Navigating the education and healthcare system in England: the transition experiences of asylum-seeking/refugee families of children with special education needs and disability

This chapter considers the development and current state of special education in New Zealand. The chapter provides a critique of current policies and practices regarding special and inclusive education for children with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND). It describes how New Zealand has followed similar patterns to other developed countries with regard to how special education facilities and specialist teacher training have evolved, and how the trend towards inclusive education has progressed. It points out that New Zealand has gone further in the inclusion of children with SEND within mainstream schools than most developed countries and that, at the same time, there has been less development of provision for children with SEND in mainstream schools. That has led to a situation where many children with SEND, who are in the lowest 20% of achievers, are not getting the specialist help that they need. As a result New Zealand has one of the largest gaps between high achieving and low achieving children in the developed world.

Background Children with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND), particularly those from families with low-income, experience inequities across educational and health outcomes. The school holidays are difficult for families with low-income, prompting UK government programmes including the Holiday Activity and Food (HAF) clubs. Little is known about how inclusive these holiday clubs are for children with SEND, despite this being a group who may particularly benefit. This study is embedded within a wider project on the HAF programme to explore the challenges and opportunities for inclusive and accessible holiday club provision and provides recommendations for the HAF Toolkit.Methods Participant experiences were captured using two qualitative methods: 1) interviews with holiday programme delivery staff and parents of attendees (staff n=28, parents n=10); 2) focus group discussions at creative workshops with parents whose children are eligible for the holiday programme but do not attend (n=22). The Framework Method and Reflexive Thematic Analysis were used. MethodsParticipant experiences were captured using two qualitative methods: (1) interviews with holiday programme delivery staff and parents of attendees (staff n = 28, parents n = 10); (2) focus group discussions at creative workshops with parents whose children are eligible for the holiday programme but do not attend (n = 22). The Framework Method and Reflexive Thematic Analysis were used.ResultsFindings reveal challenges and opportunities around accessing and experiencing the holiday clubs for children with SEND. Access subthemes included: lack of clarity in advertising whether clubs welcome children with SEND; frequent non-disclosure from parents of their child’s needs; accessible transportation; and additional resources needed for SEND provision. Experience subthemes included: food provision for children with SEND; training and staffing that covers the range of needs; and the experiences of children within mainstream provision versus specialist providers of SEND clubs. All participant groups illuminated areas where holiday clubs could be improved to ensure an enjoyable and equitable experience for children with SEND. However, wider debates around ableism and the challenges children with SEND face in society broadly were also illustrated in data. Further, the current economic context and the additional resources needed to support inclusive holiday club provision underpinned much of the data. Opportunities were highlighted such as parent volunteers and external investment, that could maximise the potential of the current government funding.ConclusionsOur findings highlight issues in access and experience of holiday clubs for children with SEND and provide potential avenues for promoting inclusivity, including how adaptations to the Toolkit could specifically improve HAF. There are considerable challenges to achieving inclusive holiday clubs (financial or otherwise) but if we are to reduce inequities, addressing these should be a public health priority.Supplementary InformationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12939-025-02607-y.

This chapter discusses how – against the backdrop of some particular contemporary challenges – the education system in England might successfully educate, and not just accommodate, pupils with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND). While the free school model might serve the needs of some parents – whose children may or may not have SEND – it is poorly aligned to the reality of planning and providing local special education. In an appearance at an Education Committee hearing in July 2018, Baroness Warnock observed that Ofsted’s focus on ‘academic excellence’ meant that it had a ‘contradictory role’ with respect to inclusion. Special education must be seen as a form of educational activity no less important, no less demanding and no less rewarding than any other, and teachers, administrators and other professionals engaged in it must have the same commitment to children with special needs as they have to all other children.

As a response to calls for social justice and promotion of children’s rights across increasingly diverse communities, the need for ‘culturally competent’ services to children, families and schools has been identified. The aim of the paper is to explore, for parents of Pakistani minority ethnic heritage in England, the role of culture and religion in shaping their understanding of disability and their experience of special educational needs and disability (SEND) services. In-depth interviews and thematic analysis were used with 10 Pakistani heritage caregivers in England who have a child with a developmental disability and a statutory identification of need for SEND (Educational, Health and Care Plan). For these parents, hidden disabilities are more difficult to understand, explain and seek services for; stigma is a major source of stress, leading to strained marital relationships, whilst faith acts as a protective factor. Within special education processes, language, perceived power differentials and mistrust are barriers to accessing appropriate services. Educational psychology services for children and families will need to find ways of adapting to engage members of diverse communities in order to protect and promote the rights of children with disabilities. The following was identified as a limitation: recruitment through schools may have identified only those parents already engaged with professionals.

This article considers implications for partnership working across the Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) system in England, at a time when a long‐overdue SEND Review is imminent and the SEND Code of Practice 2015 is awaiting a significant overhaul. It highlights the role local policy actors occupy within this system, as the progression of the Covid‐19 pandemic moves SEND partnerships towards a ‘new normal’ and there is heightened concern about missed opportunities for reform and renewal. Previously published findings from an online questionnaire (n = 100) undertaken by the Special Educational Needs Policy Research Forum provided insight into how school staff had been supported in the teaching of pupils with SEND during periods of school closures and what lessons had been learned. The present article offers a thematic analysis of the narrative responses provided in addition to the closed survey questions. The analysis generated six statements that can be understood as lessons learned from the pandemic for partnership working, drawing on the experiences of parents, school staff, and advising professionals working in local authorities.

In order to implement effective inclusive special education, all teachers need to know about the different types of special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) that are found in schools. They need to know how to identify children with SEND and also learn about practical guidelines for teaching them, whether the children are in mainstream school, special class, resource room, or special schools settings. Therefore, in this chapter, the wide range of different types of SEND will be explained and details provided for recognizing them. Information for identifying children’s SEND and practical guidelines for teaching them, which have been drawn from the literature on SEND, will be presented in separate sections for each SEND so that readers who are interested in a particular SEND can go straight to the relevant section. At the end of the chapter, a summary is provided of the key teaching guidelines that have emerged from considering each of the SEND. More details on these key teaching guidelines are then provided in later chapters of the book.

Inclusive Education at the Crossroads explores the short and long-term effectiveness of government plans to reform policy for special needs education, confronting difficult questions on policies about inclusion and suggesting alternative ways forward for achieving more effective education of children with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND).Inclusion has been a central concern for education systems globally for over three decades. However, has preoccupation with inclusion been at the expense of effective education for children with SEND? Where do policies for inclusion lead, and do they amount to the special education reform that is needed? What do the worldwide experiences of inclusion and special education reveal about how to improve the quality of education systems for all children in the future? How effective is provision for children with SEND today? Through this informative and topical book, Gordon-Gould and Hornby shine an interrogating spotlight on current provision for SEND and ask if current legislation and policy inadvertently reinforce problems; if they cause many children with SEND to fall short of their potential, as well as preventing many schools from improving their levels of overall academic attainment. Inclusive Education at the Crossroads provides theory and research for teachers, school leaders, governors, policy makers, researchers, parents, post graduate students and anyone seeking practical solutions to meeting the needs of pupils with SEND in any global context. It will encourage open debate about the essence of educational inclusion in order to stimulate creative thinking among all stakeholders.

What is it like to be a child with SEND (Special Educational Needs and Disabilities) in schools today? What is it like to be a parent to four such children and fight for their rights?Carrie Grant’s children have – like all of us – complex identities. Of the four of them, two are autistic, three have AD(H)D, one is adopted, all are of dual heritage, and three hold various queer and trans non-binary identities. In this inspiring and at times heartbreaking book, the presenter, coach, and advocate shares stories from her family’s experiences with education, schools and mental health services, as mum to children who are classified as SEND (Special Education Needs and Disabilities). These stories explore how school – when those delivering and managing education are poorly trained and ill equipped for a diverse population – can be at best ineffective, and, at worst, traumatising. An inspiring call to action, this book is essential reading for: Teachers and aspiring teachers who want to know more about how to meet the needs of a diverse classroom. SENCOs (Special Education Needs Coordinators) and those training to work in SEND support. GPs, community health workers, and workers in Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS). Parents of children with SEND, who want to know how they can engage with formal education to advocate for their child’s needs.

This systematic review and meta‐analysis examined randomised controlled trials and quasi‐experimental design studies targeting interventions to improve educational outcomes for students with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND). It identified 467 studies with 2891 outcomes for the narrative review, and 349 studies with 1758 outcomes were included in the meta‐analysis. Outcomes included in the meta‐analysis related to reading ( n = 1139), writing ( n = 279), maths ( n = 284), science ( n = 3) and general attainment ( n = 53). While there was substantial variability, targeted interventions for specific SEND groups improved educational outcomes by an average of 5 months compared to control groups, with positive impacts on reading, maths and writing. The setting (mainstream vs. special education) did not affect reading or writing outcomes, but interventions with students in mainstream settings showed larger gains in maths. Intervention effects were consistent regardless of delivery method, implementor or control group type. We discuss the implications of the findings for theory and practice, the research gaps identified and future directions. Context and implications Rationale for this study: Students with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) often require targeted interventions to support their educational outcomes. Previous evaluations of targeted interventions have often focussed on one specific group of SEND or one specific outcome. Why the new findings matter: This review included randomised controlled and quasi‐experimental trials that evaluated targeted interventions across all categories of SEND. Across educational outcomes, pupils improved by an average of 5 months, with large variation evident. However, there were no consistent differences regarding delivery method, implementor or control group type. Implications for practitioners and policy makers: Despite gaps in the evidence, this review demonstrates that school setting and stage of education moderate the effectiveness of targeted interventions, with these effects varying across educational outcomes. These findings highlight the need for context‐sensitive approaches rather than one‐size‐fits‐all solutions. By clarifying how contextual factors influence intervention success, the review offers actionable insights, supporting evidence‐informed decisions to improve outcomes for students with SEND.

This article examines the Special Educational Needs and Disability (SEND) system in England, and the ‘crisis’ it is reported to be in. It is argued that three principal factors lie at the heart of the crisis: a failure to be inclusive, out of control spending on SEND and the lack of confidence of children and families in the system. It reports the significant consequences of the damage inflicted upon young people and their families but reframes them, following Ladson-Billings’ construction of education debt, as special education debts. These are represented as inclusion debts, economic debts and trust debts. A series of provocations, in the form of questions aligned with the three principal factors and their attendant debts, are offered as a means of repaying these debts to children and their families, but also to teachers and educational leaders.

The Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) system in England was reformed in 2014, including the introduction of child-centred legally binding education, health and care plans (EHCPs) and expectations for improved multi-agency working coordinated by local authorities (LAs). Since then, service-user satisfaction has declined, and children’s outcomes have not improved. Critics cite local variation in SEND provision and limited accountability for implementation failures as contributing factors. This scoping review summarises peer-reviewed and grey literature as well as open-access data sources reporting LA and multi-academy trust (MAT) level variation in SEND provision to identify key reasons for local variation SEND services, and data sources that could be used to better monitor local public bodies. We identified and graded 120 articles/reports (18 peer-reviewed, 102 grey) and 8 open-access data sources. The literature investigated nine topic areas; most studies were low quality. Eight open-access data sources included information about SEND prevalence, demand and provision complaints. Our review highlights that LAs were underprepared and under-resourced to implement the reforms. The administration involved in EHCPs contribute to variation in multiple ways. Greater standardisation and guidance for professionals could reduce variation. Existing data sources could be better used to improve monitoring and accountability for local provision, which should include MATs given their potential to influence SEND provision. Low-quality studies dominated the grey literature. More rigorous methods and reporting standards could also improve decision-making and service planning.

The voices of young people with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) have historically been omitted from research concerning their sporting experiences and provisions [Coates, J., & Vickerman, P. (2013). A review of methodological strategies for consulting children with special educational needs in physical education. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 28(3), 333–347. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2013.797705; Wickman, K. (2015). Experiences and Perceptions of Young Adults with Physical Disabilities on Sports. Social Inclusion, 3(3), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.17645/si.v3i3.158]. Consequently, this paper, informed by innovative participatory methods for exploring the experiences of young people with SEND who engaged in UK School Games, offers insight on inclusive school sport from the perspectives of young people with SEND. Participants included young people aged 11–18 with a range of SEND (n = 18) who attended three different types of school (mainstream college, mainstream secondary with designated SEND provision and a secondary special school). The research design encompassed young people with SEND vlogging their experiences across two inclusive School Games county finals, video editing workshops replacing traditional follow-up methods before culminating in a series of young people-led showcases. Data were analysed using a reflexive thematic analysis, whereby the vlog audio was detached and transcribed verbatim before the analysis was performed consisting of a hybrid use of Nvivo10 and traditional coding techniques. Findings and discussion document the experiences of young people with SEND at the inclusive School Games competitions across three themes; Opportunities for inclusive school sport, Challenging perceptions and Meaningful School Games. The implications of these findings will be valuable to teachers and other stakeholders seeking to provide inclusive school sport and the methodology is of interest to researchers wishing to engage young people in participatory research.

The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted greatly the mental health of children. We performed a systematic review to better understand the impact of the pandemic on children with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) across different SEND categories. Following PRISMA guidelines, of 1699 search results, 66 studies were included in our analysis as they met our inclusion criteria concerning: a) children with SEND; b) focus on COVID-19; c) longitudinal or cross-sectional design; d) quantitative or qualitative measures; and e) mental health or well-being outcomes. Our review suggests that there was a typically negative impact on mental health and well-being for children with SEND, yet experiences varied on the basis of individual differences, rather than category of SEND. Findings highlight the need for interventions and policy implementations to improve the everyday mental well-being of this population.

The COVID-19 pandemic has a multifaceted impact on mental health due to ill health, restrictions and lockdowns, and loss of employment and institutional support. COVID-19 may disproportionally impact families with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) due to the already higher prevalence of mental health conditions in children with SEND and their parents. Therefore, it is essential to determine the short-term impact of the pandemic on the mental health of families with SEND in order to identify their ongoing health support needs. The current study aims to examine the anxiety level and concerns of children with SEND and their parents living in China. The sample consisted of 271 parents of children with SEND aged between 6 and 17 years (Mage = 8.37; SDage = 2.76). Parents completed an online survey between 10 April to 8 June 2020. Both child and parental anxiety levels and various concerns increased after the initial wave of COVID-19 when compared with retrospective pre-COVID-19 levels. Parental anxiety and concern levels were significantly higher for those living in rural areas compared to urban areas. In addition, parental and child anxiety and concern levels were significantly correlated with each other. Parental anxiety at the lowest level made a unique and significant statistical contribution to children's anxiety levels. The implications of the study findings are discussed.

The 2015 Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) Code of Practice (CoP) was a significant reformation of provision for children and young people with additional and complex learning needs in England. This paper explores the influence the 2015 SEND CoP has had on professionals working within post-16 education in England. The study was empirically grounded and qualitative in methodological orientation. Eighteen participants from an English special education college took part in the study [n = 18]. The study has found that barriers to implementation of the SEND guidance continue to exist. Recurring themes relate to a lack of training, time, funding and responsibility held by professionals. There also continues to be a lack of evidence of the graduated approach being applied to practice. However, findings do suggest that some professionals have begun to recognise the positive influence of the SEND CoP and have altered their practice accordingly, placing the learner needs at the centre. The authors conclude that there is currently a gap between policy and practice. Thus, education professionals cannot successfully apply the guidance within the SEND policy to their practice until the adequate special educational support is put in place. The authors argue that more must be done to unite both policy and practice together in the interest of young people with special educational needs and disabilities.