FAQs on education for disabled children and young people
The Equality Act 2010 states that a person is disabled if they have a physical or mental impairment which has a substantial and long-term negative effect on their ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities. The Act also provides clarifications and exclusions to this definition. Medical conditions such as asthma and diabetes, mental health conditions such as bipolar or depression, learning difficulties such as dyslexia and other conditions such as autism or Down Syndrome, are all covered by this definition.
There are various ways in which disability can be understood; CSIE’s understanding is in line with the social model of disability and the views expressed by UK disabled people’s organisations. Some people have physical, sensory or mental impairments; they become disabled if no adjustment is made in response to their impairments. In this sense disability is an experience arising from the interaction between a) people’s impairments and b) inflexibility in society and its institutions. For example, a wheelchair user can access the space at the top or bottom of a ramp, but would be dis-abled in front of a flight of steps.
Separate “special” schools were first set up in the 19th and early 20th centuries, at a time when people with unusual bodies or minds were not part of mainstream society and institutions. Today social values have transformed and disability equality is firmly established in national and international legislation. Long-standing convention and familiarity, however, can mask the discriminatory aspects of an educational system which has been set up to exclude disabled children from ordinary local schools. CSIE suggests that with creative use of resources, including human resources, this question can be turned on its head: why deprive disabled children of the opportunity to grow up, learn and develop with their peers?
We need to look at the full picture: as well as running costs of maintaining separate settings with concentrated resources, disabled children need to get to them every day. Millions of pounds are spent each year to transport disabled children long distances twice a day, often by taxi with an escort, in order to educate them away from their non-disabled peers. This makes neither financial nor social or educational sense.
There is no doubt that resources and training are valuable and that accessing them often requires money, time and will. (And we all know what happens “when there is a will”.) Principles underpinning “special education”, however, are exactly the same as those underpinning “education”: setting meaningful and relevant learning objectives, building on a child’s knowledge and skills, one step at a time, utilising their strengths. Many teachers have been pleasantly surprised to find that creative ways to respond to the diversity of learners often emerge from their own resourceful thinking, sometimes in consultation with external agencies, always in consultation with young people and their families. This is not to say that including disabled children in ordinary schools is easy, but that it is possible. There is no type or degree of impairment which hasn’t been accommodated in an ordinary school.
If we want to prepare our pupils for life in an inclusive society, it seems pointless to work with some children in one type of setting and with others in separate institutions. All children and young people benefit from growing up, learning and developing with each other. In the words of Micheline Mason, founder and former director of the Alliance for Inclusive Education: “Appropriate resources are vital for the learning and development of disabled children. The most essential resource is free and abundant in mainstream schools: non-disabled children.”
Research has shown that children with statements of special educational needs for moderate learning difficulties are bullied as much in mainstream as they are in special schools. The same research also found that pupils attending special schools experienced far more bullying outside of school, by other children in their own neighbourhood.
Many schools that have included disabled pupils have found that children are far more accommodating than adults had anticipated. In any case, harassment of any student is far less likely to occur in a school which fosters inclusive values. If disabled children are at risk of being bullied, it makes more sense to address the bullying and minimise the risk, rather than deciding to exclude disabled children as a way of protecting them.
The vision of an inclusive education for all learners does not equate to admitting all children in schools as we know them. Much more than this, it is about rethinking how teaching and learning are organised, so that schools can value, respect and support the learning & development of all children from the local community, whatever their background or perceived ability. At a time when schools are increasingly expected to support personalised learning, there is no reason why tailor-made provision has to be offered in separate institutions. Careful attention to differentiation and resourcefulness in teaching methods and materials, even if prompted by the presence of one pupil, have been shown to benefit all.
There was never a moment in time when policy makers considered how best to educate disabled children and decided in favour of separate schools. This didn’t happen ever, anywhere. Separate schools began appearing in the 19th century, mostly as isolated attempts to provide education for children whom the then education system was leaving behind. That education system was based on social values of its time and, therefore, saw no point in educating disabled children and even considered some of them incapable of learning.
Nowadays social values have transformed and disability equality is firmly established in national and international legislation, which clearly state every child’s right to mainstream education. Disability equality is understood in multiple and contrasting ways, however, to the extent that what is seen as good educational provision by some is considered anachronistic and discriminatory by others. What is education’s answer to the claim that established systems act as disabling barriers for some children and young people? CSIE sees this as a human rights question, to which education is urgently called upon to find an answer.
Disabled adults tell us that segregated education is inappropriate because it perpetuates stereotypes, disempowers disabled people and keeps them at the margins of society. The issue of mainstream or segregated schooling for disabled children is often seen as a polarised argument that remains unresolved. Supporters of a mainstream education for all advocate this in the name of disability equality and the understanding that, if some children are excluded from ordinary schools, prejudice and discrimination will persist. Supporters of special schools, on the other hand, argue that these are needed because they offer provision that is not regularly available in mainstream schools. The two positions do not contradict one another. The first represents a human rights position, the second a partial reflection on existing practice.
Children learn from one another, as well as from adults, and establish friendships in school that can last a lifetime. No matter how excellent the facilities or how committed and experienced the staff may be, the fact remains that separate special schools are segregating institutions. They deprive disabled learners of the opportunity to grow up, learn and develop with their peers.
Including disabled children in ordinary schools, when well-resourced and managed, has been shown to be of benefit to all children. It might be worth exploring what assumptions lie behind this question. What is it that is believed to make inclusion impossible for some children? If it is the type or degree of their impairment, why does this pose a challenge for education? If it is the culture and organisation of mainstream schools as we know them, are these fixed and rigid, beyond the possibility of change?
It sometimes helps to consider the same issues in a different context. If you, the reader of this text, were to become disabled (and many of us will, possibly in later life) how would it feel if you were denied access to your regular place of work or leisure? How would it be if you were told that, instead, you should attend an alternative place, which is tailor-made for your needs and full of other people like you? You may well value some contact with others who are, for example, wheelchair-users or partially sighted, but would you be happy to have this instead of your regular contact with existing friends and colleagues?
Let us now return to the issue of schooling for disabled learners. If it is thought that a pupil “cannot access the curriculum” is it, in principle, better to turn the pupil away or to make every effort to make the curriculum relevant and accessible to this pupil?
After all, seeing disabled people as significantly different from non-disabled people is only one way of meaning-making; it focuses more on differences than on similarities. When considering children’s “needs” some people may focus on a perceived need for physiotherapy or speech & language therapy, while others may prioritise needs shared by all children, such as to belong to your local community, to make friends or to learn about collaboration and negotiation. After all, we are all good at some things and need help with others. And we probably all find it frustrating if other people define us by what we need help with.
What is expected of schools has changed considerably over a short period of time. Until the 1960s children and young people categorised as “educationally subnormal (severe)” were thought to be “ineducable”. Provision for them was made by health authorities, often in Junior Training Centres. The Education Act of 1970 transferred responsibility for these children to local education authorities and many Junior Training Centres got renamed as “special schools”. A decade later, the 1981 Education Act abolished all previous categories of “handicap”, introduced in legislation the concept of “special educational need” and stated that every child has a legal right to be educated in a mainstream school, as long as certain conditions are met. Subsequent laws have amended the specific conditions, but the basic entitlement has been reiterated in all education laws, including in the Children and Families Act 2014. How has education changed in response?
Recent evidence confirms that in some areas schools have transformed and are successfully educating children with any type or degree of impairment. In other areas long-established views about how schools should organise teaching and learning have remained fixed and there continues to be an underlying assumption, shared by many professionals, that some disabled children cannot be included in their local school. There is little support or incentive for this to change and this generates a vicious circle of not admitting disabled pupils because disabled pupils had not been admitted before.
FAQs on education for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender children and young people
This is one of various acronyms referring to people’s sexual orientation and gender identity; it stands for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender. Frequently used alternatives are LGB and LGBTQ, where Q stands for queer or questioning. Some children and young people may look or dress differently to their peers but this alone does not mean that they identify as LGBT, or that they will when they are older. Some are clear about their sexual orientation and gender identity, while others may be unsure or have not thought about it yet. For some, sexual orientation or gender identity may change over time. Children of LGBT parents/carers are no more, and no less, likely than children with heterosexual or cisgendered footnote 1 parents/carers to be LGBT themselves. It is also important to recognise that there are many words by which individuals refer to their sexual orientation and gender identity and that the terms lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer or questioning are not adopted by everyone.
When a person is born they are assigned a gender based on the appearance of the baby’s genitals. Some people (often referred to as ‘intersex’) are born with ambiguous genitalia or have sex chromosomal variations that become apparent during puberty or later in life but they, too, are usually assigned a gender at birth. People often assume that the gender assigned to a baby at birth will be the gender that that person will grow up to be. People whose gender identity and/or gender expression differs from the gender they were assigned at birth are known as transgender, often abbreviated to trans. Some trans people experience their own gender as unambiguously male or female. Others may describe themselves by a range of terms, for example un-gendered, genderqueer, queer or simply human, on the grounds that a binary gender system (for example man/woman, male/female) cannot capture the full spectrum of gender identities. Some trans people transition to the gender with which they identify. This means that they change gender, moving to their ‘acquired’ gender, with or without medical intervention (e.g. hormones or surgery). Some do not like the concept of ‘acquired’ gender, arguing that their gender identity has not changed and they have not ‘acquired’ a new one. The terms ‘gender reassignment’ and ‘acquired gender’, however, are extensively used in legislation (such as the Gender Recognition Act) and dominate the medical community’s understanding of trans identities. The Equality Act 2010 protects from discrimination anyone who is undergoing, has undergone or intends to undergo gender reassignment, with or without medical intervention.
Gender identity and sexual orientation are different characteristics of human identity and experience, yet they are often intertwined within political campaigning, activism, popular consciousness and school policy. Some people from within LGBT communities feel that there is no common ground and prefer that the T is not included, or even that lesbians, gay men and bisexuals all self-organise separately. Others feel that there is strength in numbers and recognise that all LGBT people can experience discrimination and bullying because they challenge conventional ideas of gender. It is worth remembering that some trans people may also identify as lesbian, gay or bisexual and that many trans people experience homophobia from people who confuse their gender identity with homosexuality.
Parents can be reminded that LGBT people – both children and adults – make up a significant part of our society and of any society. They are sometimes less visible than heterosexual and cisgender people, possibly because it feels unsafe for them to be open about who they are. The fact that LGBT people exist is not up for negotiation.
Schools have a moral and legal obligation to make sure that LGBT pupils and staff, as well as those who have LGBT friends or family members, hear positive messages about LGBT identities in the way heterosexual and cisgender people take for granted. Schools would be failing their pupils if they did not challenge homophobia and transphobia consistently and if they did not educate all pupils about the important role LGBT people play in our society.
The Equality Act 2010 places a legal duty on schools to eliminate discrimination and harassment, advance equality of opportunity and promote good relations between people who have, and those who do not have, a number of protected characteristics. Gender reassignment, sex and sexual orientation are among these protected characteristics. Remaining silent about LGBT issues is not an option.
When talking to children of any age, people frequently make reference to sexual orientation without any mention of sexual activity, which is a different matter altogether. People in schools often refer to ‘husbands and wives’, ‘mummies and daddies’, or ‘boyfriends and girlfriends’ without any mention of LGB relationships. There is no reason why discussions cannot reflect the full diversity of families that exist in our society, without any worry that we are talking to young children about sex.
It is important to remember that the Equality Act 2010 places a duty on schools to recognise the existence of families based on same-sex partnerships, and to discuss these families as confidently and regularly as they do others. It is important that children from LGBT families feel that their families are recognised, accepted and respected.
People who use the word gay pejoratively may mean no harm, but those who hear it can feel it. Any use of the word gay to mean that something is nonsense, broken, or otherwise substandard, belittles gay identities. Pupils can be helped to understand the potential harm by being encouraged to imagine that the phrase was ‘that’s so Welsh (or German, or Christian, or any other significant aspect of their own identity)’. Gay identities are both entirely usual and a source of pride. Schools should ensure that all members of staff are equally committed to challenging any use of homophobic language. At the same time, it is important that people feel safe to talk openly about LGBT identities in school.
Transphobia is a term used to describe discrimination experienced by trans people, people who are thought to be trans, or friends and relatives of trans people. Schools should ensure that anti-bullying policies address both homophobia and transphobia, while also making sure that staff and children are aware of the differences and overlaps between the two and feel confident in responding to each. Homophobic and transphobic incidents are both regarded as hate crimes within the legal system.
Young people come out to staff for a variety of reasons, including a need for pastoral support, a desire for information or redress for how they are being treated.
The single most useful thing staff can do is simply be accepting and supporting. Young people have told us that they find it helpful when staff thank them for sharing this information with them. For some young people this may be the first time that they have ever verbalised their LGBT identity and the process may be nerve-wracking. Young people have also said that they find it helpful when staff listen to them and ask them why they have shared this information. For example, a young person may tell a member of staff that they are trans because they do not know who to turn to for information about transitioning, while another may disclose that they are bisexual because they do not feel their specific needs for information around safer sex are being met within the Sex and Relationship Education programme. Who, if anyone, the member of staff shares such a disclosure with depends upon the specific context, while individual schools have established child protection policies. These should be adhered to at all times. There should be no need for staff to share a simple disclosure of LGBT identity with anyone else unless a pupil requests it.
Children and young people who identify as, or are perceived to be, LGBT (as well as those who have friends or family members who are, or are perceived to be, LGBT), face a very real and disproportionate level of discrimination and harassment in primary and secondary schools. In many schools homophobic or transphobic bullying are rife, but staff dismiss it as banter and do little, if anything, to challenge it. The Ofsted report No place for bullying (June 2012) suggests that this happens even in schools where other forms of prejudice-based bullying are more effectively dealt with.
It is vital that schools consistently challenge homophobic and transphobic bullying but it is equally important to discuss and celebrate LGBT identities. It is the duty of all staff to ensure that every member of the school community feels valued, irrespective of their sexual orientation or gender identity, or that of any family members. Just as racism cannot be fully countered by challenging negative incidents, it is important that schools help children and young people to understand heterosexist and gender normative attitudes, make them explicit and challenge them in a safe and supportive environment. Inclusive schools enable young people to be happy irrespective of who they are attracted to or how they choose to express their gender. Where schools foster a safe, welcoming and respectful atmosphere, and where diversity is genuinely valued and celebrated, homophobia and transphobia are significantly reduced, if not eliminated entirely.
Additional ways in which schools can celebrate LGBT identities and challenge heterosexist and gender normative attitudes are:
- engage with LGBT History Month (www.lgbthistorymonth.org.uk) in February each year;
- ensure that all school policies which deal with diversity specifically mention sexual orientation and gender identity;
- frequently use LGBT people as examples in lessons in every subject area and across every level (see www.the-classroom.org.uk for examples);
- help children and young people to develop an awareness of, and a language around, the range of sexual orientations and gender identities that exist;
- make use of displays to include images of LGBT people, information about local LGBT youth groups and materials from LGBT campaigning organisations;
- ensure that the library has books that include LGBT characters for all reading levels;
- acknowledge and celebrate important events in the lives of LGBT members of the school community, such as Civil Partnerships and Gay Pride;
- engage with broader initiatives such as International Day Against Homophobia and Transphobia and The Transgender Day of Remembrance;
- involve the whole school community in finding ways to respond to, and to prevent, homophobia and transphobia.
Footnote 1:
Cisgender and cissexual (often abbreviated to simply cis) describe related types of gender identity where individuals’ experiences of their own gender match the sex they were assigned at birth. Sociologists Kristen Schilt and Laurel Westbrook define cisgender as a label for “individuals who have a match between the gender they were assigned at birth, their bodies, and their personal identity” as a complement to transgender.
FAQs about raising the achievement of all pupils
Sometimes no matter how good, or how plentiful, the teaching is, pupils are not in a good position to learn. Schools that are effective in raising the achievement of all learners track pupil progress and scrutinise this data, identify which pupils would benefit from additional support and consider how best to help each one. Other than extra lessons, meaningful interventions can take the form of pastoral care, improving pupils’ well-being, sense of belonging and safety in school, helping pupils understand how school work can benefit them, or offering additional support to improve organisation, learning strategies or use of English. Assessment data can also feed into staff development or be used to challenge low expectations which some staff may have of their pupils. Schools that raise the achievement of all pupils tend to have strong leadership teams which value and celebrate diversity, and teachers who are well prepared to respond to diversity, have a strong sense of professional identity and feel empowered. They have high aspirations for all their pupils, knowing what they want them to achieve and how they are going to get there, ensure that nobody in school feels unsafe, belittled or looked down upon, and take every opportunity to challenge prejudice and stereotypes. Through providing a safe and supportive learning environment, teachers’ high expectations are reflected in young people’s belief in themselves and, ultimately, their performance. Responsibility is understood to be shared among all staff, not just pastoral or support staff. It is also important to involve parents (see below) and to have a curriculum that is meaningful and relevant to all learners and is responsive to diversity.
Parents may appear disinterested or disengaged for a number of reasons; some may work very long hours, may not be confident English speakers, may have had unhappy school experiences themselves or may be inclined to leave their children’s education “to the experts” without considering that they, too, are also experts on their own children. Making parents feel welcome in school and seen as partners in their child’s education can help to keep the door open for them. Many parents value events which help them understand how, for example, reading, maths or another subject are taught in school; this may be very different from their own school experience or what they had imagined. It is important to try to make such events accessible to all parents, for example by providing interpreters, to ensure all parents can be empowered to support their children’s learning at home. Such events can also provide opportunities to get to know parents and encourage them to become involved in school life. Connect the curriculum to the experiences and backgrounds of these communities and see them as a rich learning resource that is valued in the school. Engage settled community members to support new arrivals.
It is important to get things right from the very beginning and a rigorous induction process, differentiated for families with different needs and clearly laid out in an induction policy, can help ensure this. It is important that every new pupil gets the same quality of welcome, even if this is through a different process. For children who speak little or no English it is all the more important to ask their family pertinent questions about the young person’s background and home circumstances, so that class and subject teachers can have access to a full range of information about their new pupil. It is also important to seek the help of interpreters in order to assess the learning of children who speak little or no English. It is important to remember that, in addition to language barriers, young people that have recently arrived to the UK are likely to feel homesick, overwhelmed, confused and may come from a background that has very different understandings or expectations of education. Finding out about these things and responding accordingly can make it infinitely easier for young people to settle in. It is vital not to lose sight of high expectations for all learners.
Following the induction process it is important to keep lines of communication open between school and family, and to continue using interpreters for as much as possible. It is essential that all staff feel confident to respond to the full diversity of pupils who make up the school community and to challenge any assumptions, prejudice or stereotypes. More detailed practical support can be sought from the National Association for Language Development in the Curriculum (NALDIC, www.naldic.org.uk) or from local ethnic minority achievement (EMA) teams.
Unlike attainment, which is linked to particular benchmarks, achievement is a relative concept linked to individual circumstances. Schools are well accustomed to negotiating realistic learning objectives that are meaningful and relevant to each pupil. This applies to learning disabled pupils as well. Subject-specific learning objectives may be different from the objectives of most of their peers, and will need to be negotiated in relation to each young person’s particular strengths and needs. In addition, some learning disabled young people may need help to learn important life lessons which their peers often learn from experience. Skills for living and learning together, or interpersonal skills necessary for successful relationships, are among the skills that some learning disabled children may need help with; for example learning to make and keep friends, or to negotiate and collaborate with others. Whatever the learning objective, however, reaching a goal is always an achievement. Raising the achievement of learning disabled pupils is every bit as important as this is for anybody else, if not more so! Learning disabled pupils had been left out of ordinary schools for historic reasons and raising social and educational aspirations for them is long overdue.
We educate children about a range of issues, places and people that are not in the school’s immediate environment. This helps prepare children to live in a diverse world. We need to educate children about a wide range of cultures, faiths, sexual orientations, gender identities and more, in order to help them embrace difference and resist prejudice.
Gypsy, Roma and Traveller (GRT) communities are not homogenous communities but they do have linked histories and experiences of racism. They are recognised in UK law as ethnic minority groups, which means they are protected against racism and discrimination. Across Europe overt prejudice towards these communities has always been more intense than towards other ethnic communities. They suffer disproportionately from both direct and indirect discrimination across societies. They are the most marginalised ethnic minority in the UK and continue to endure extreme levels of prejudice and discrimination. Stereotypes are strong and widespread and some people from these communities feel that popular television series about them do not represent their culture accurately. Even if you have no GRT pupils in school, discussing issues about them will enable better understanding of their ways of life and help to break down prejudice against them. Specialist Traveller Services can provide support and training for schools and pupils on overcoming prejudice and discrimination against GRT communities. The Equality Act 2010 places a legal duty on schools to promote good relations between people who have characteristics protected by the Act, such as belonging to a GRT community, and those who do not.
Most schools understand, and can help concerned parents to understand, that there is a moral and legal imperative for supporting the learning of all pupils. School policies about support for learning should be open and transparent, with clear aims and clearly articulated benefits to all pupils and the school as a whole. Parents can be helped to understand that promoting equality of opportunity does not mean that all pupils should be treated the same. Quite to the contrary, in order to treat people equally, we often need to treat them differently because some may need particular support that others do not. By not giving others the same support (which they do not need) we are not depriving them of anything. Parents can also be reassured that resources to support the learning of specific pupils are not diverted from everyday school provision. For example, pupil premium funding comes from a separate national budget with the express purpose of targeting specific, effective support over and above what the school ordinarily provides.
