LONDON DAILY ARCHIVE
Study Reveals Disparities in Identification of Special Educational Needs Among Pupils in England
Research by the Education Policy Institute highlights significant variations in the identification of special educational needs based on school type and student circumstances.
11 February 2025 · 14:32 UTC
The research highlights how factors such as school type—specifically academies versus local authority-maintained schools—background, and attendance levels influence the likelihood of pupils being recognized as having special educational needs.
The EPI's report reveals that pupils attending academies are less frequently identified as having SEND compared to their peers in traditional local authority schools.
This trend is observed particularly in areas where there is a high prevalence of academization.
The report posits three potential explanations for this phenomenon: either fewer SEND students are enrolling in academies; there is a systematic under-identification of special needs; or academies are meeting students’ needs more effectively without formal recognition.
Additionally, the study points out that children who face language barriers, particularly those for whom English is a second language, are at a heightened risk of not being identified as having SEND.
Similarly, students with high rates of absenteeism or those who frequently change schools may have their needs overlooked, rendering them less visible within the educational system.
Gender disparities are also noted, with girls less frequently identified with social, emotional, and mental health needs compared to boys, despite having similar chances of experiencing behavioral or emotional disorders.
The study analyzed data from two cohorts, each comprising 600,000 children, as they progressed through their primary and secondary education to assess the identification rates of SEND.
The report identifies a trend described as “rationing” of support, particularly in disadvantaged communities.
It finds that while children from deprived neighborhoods are more likely to be identified with SEND, those with less disadvantage—particularly those whose parents are more equipped to advocate for their children's needs—have a higher identification rate compared to their peers in similar circumstances.
Jo Hutchinson, the EPI’s director for SEND and additional needs, remarked on the report's findings, emphasizing the existence of a long-acknowledged 'lottery' in SEND identification across primary and secondary schools.
She highlighted that specific groups, such as students with less visible needs due to mobility issues or those attending academies, face elevated risks of under-identification.
In response to the report, Daniel Kebede, the general secretary of the National Education Union, expressed concerns about the admissions policies of many academy schools, indicating that these institutions have historically denied admission to SEND students based on assertions that their needs could be better met elsewhere.
Arooj Shah, chair of the Local Government Association’s board for children and young people, called for immediate action from the government to articulate its plans for reforming the SEND system.
She emphasized the importance of enhancing inclusion in mainstream education settings and proposed the establishment of local inclusion partnerships to facilitate better assessments and collaborative efforts among councils, schools, and health services.
The findings of this EPI report underscore the complexities and challenges surrounding the identification and support of special educational needs in England's educational landscape.