Unveiling the Landscape of Special Education

Introduction:

According to the definition coined by the Individual with disabilities education Act (IDEA, 2004) the term special education includes the specially devised instructions which are offered to the parents of the children with disabilities totally free of cost. The educational instructional can be provided in the home setting, classroom, hospital or at any other specialised organisation. The special education includes the following parameters such as: services related to audiology, speech language, travel and vocational education, interpretation, therapeutic services related to physical and occupation, the early diagnosis of the child with disabilities, rehabilitation and counselling services, nurse in school, social work service and most importantly educating the parents (Miles, S. and Singal, N., 2010; Smith, 2015).

Aim of the study: The value of this research is that it highlights the real need for external agencies, professionals such as the specialist provision and parents to work together to meet the special education needs of children. The area is problematic because clear boundaries have not been drawn between the roles of the three stakeholders highlighted.

Justification for Undertaking this Research:

Several research based evidence have revealed that the inclusion of the family along with the professional agencies greatly improves the level of success of the student as it diminishes the behavioural problem of absenteeism. The approach helps to retain the confidence of the parent about the capacity of children concerning the education. This is because, in the initial years of development, the child may require help in several aspects related to education such as for solving homework of school, at the time writing and reading, for the evaluation of information, while expressing, during making friends as they cannot behave properly or organise. During this time, the child suffers from difficulties concerning the emotional, intellectual, social and physical development. Therefore, they necessitate help from speech language therapists, clinicians and educational psychologists and the family also plays the key role for providing the education to children with SEN. This allows the children to secure grades with improved social and behaviour skills (Miles, S. and Singal, N., 2010; Lipkin, et al, 2015).

In this regard, the concept of inclusive education is a multidimensional one which includes four major principles such as: all the individuals are engaged in a flexible and challenging method of general education; the strengths in the response of the diversity are evaluated during the whole process; the utilization of the reflective practices along with the differential instruction are employed within the method of teaching; the approach builds up a community which includes the students, parents, teachers, families and the other professional organisations. The concept of mainstream education involves the children with SEN along with the children of normal potentialities. By using this approach, the children can take part both in the regular classroom and also in the special education classroom which prepares them to face and fight with odd challenges of their life (Coates, et al, 2010; Kozleski, et al, 2011; Loreman, et al, 2010).

Moreover, the Swedish government had also emphasized on the introduction of the pupil voice within the educational organisation. The term pupil voice denotes the different opinions, beliefs, the cultural background of the student and the perspectives of the individual student or the group of students and also the inclusion of the different instructional techniques and the approaches depending on the choice, passions and interests of the students. The report presented the possibility that children with special educational need ought to be 'integrated' in to mainstream tutoring, but the understudy's voice and the desires of the guardians were commonly not taken in to thought. The Children's Act (1989) and the United Nations, instructed that children have the privilege be tuned in to, and had the right to have their conclusions heard (Archard, 2014). The greatest change in special educational needs accompanied the presentation of the Children and Families Act (2014), which subtleties the obligation of local guardians to give information and guidance to kids, to empower them to settle on educated choices with respect to their arrangement. It focuses on the necessity that every single instructive expert should give due thought to the voice of the children before choices on arrangement is made. Further guidance was discharged by the Department for Education (2014) giving clear and succinct information in regards to the significance of incorporating student’s voice in instruction, particularly inside special educational needs arrangements. It clarifies that with the introduction of pupil’s voice, it tends to be conceivable to see an expansion in inspiration to learn, with a positive effect noted in the fulfilment of little children.

Benefits and barriers of working with variety of agencies in supporting children with special educational needs:

Organizations with professional experts for early childhood from a varied scope of foundations cooperates (teams up) to accomplish the best results for children and families. Professionals themselves likewise advantage from working in association. Coordinated effort gives chances to proficient advancement through formal and casual gaining from peers with differing experience and aptitude. By sharing information and experience through collective organizations with different specialists, analysts and strategy creators, educational experts can add to new information about learning and improvement of special education need children. Working in association requires proficient duty and regard for each other's jobs, understanding and skill, and is the obligation of all youth experts. Professionals comprehend the significance of conveying and arranging in cooperation so as to react to children and to guarantee exhaustive, all encompassing and persistent ways to deal with their instruction and care. It is critical that experts work in a cooperative, composed approach to help families and youngsters, guaranteeing that the children's eventual benefits are at the focal point everything being equal (Flottman, et al, 2011; Gillen, 2011).

The Children Act (2004) presented enactment in England and Wales that demanded multi-organization collaboration. The late drive towards incorporated attempting to improve results for children and youngsters came about in light of the inclination that discontinuity and 'working in silos' can bring about awkward and less viable help for families. Literature distinguishes numerous hindrances to the advancement of viable multi-organization working including: diverse information bases, societies and style of working, and force connections between agencies, experts and volunteers; absence of suitable preparing; financing and assets; jobs and duties; contending needs and an absence of clearness on points; correspondence and data sharing; support from the management; momentary activities that don't permit time to conquer proficient or organisations rigidities; an absence of acknowledgment about aptitudes, time and vitality required to set up connections; and individual characteristics (Edwards, et al, 2009; Atkinson, et al, 2002).

Research Questions:

What are the approaches to include the parents in the education process of the children and Young People with SEN along with the other professional agencies?

What are the benefits and drawbacks observed with the inclusion of parents in the learning process along with the other professional agencies?

Working of Multiagency in different setting:

With regard to the service to the children, the National Service Framework, the English green paper, 'Each Child Matters' (DfES, 2003) and the Children Bill (DfES 2004) had given high need to an incorporated way to deal with service provision. The foundation to the multi-organisation activities set up plainly differed massively – both regarding the individual foundations of those were included, and with respect to the connections of organization in the power (Johnson, 2011; Cheminais, 2014). Interviewees additionally portrayed a scope of manners by which both individual experts and organizations got associated with multi-office work. Interviewees depicted their own experiences regarding having a wide scope of preparing and capabilities, and a wide scope of jobs inside a wide range of offices. Over 33% of those engaged with the activities under investigation had worked in numerous offices during their vocation, demonstrating this as a helpful encounter for multi-organization working (Atkinson, et al, 2002). The responsibilities undertaken by multi-organizations involves controlling or the management gathering, that acted as a key wonder in a wide range of multiagency action, the mutual obligation between the offices in question and merging of roles and responsibilities. An overlapping of the roles showed that limits between the organizations had become obscured, and in the fundamental this was felt to have been advantageous. Be that as it may, others felt that keeping up particular jobs was urgent in permitting singular organizations to make an important and extraordinary commitment to multi-agency working. Professionals working in a joint effort with different organisations consequently need to adjust varying jobs and duties at all these various levels of setting such as nationally, locally or within variety of organisations (Walker, et al, 2018).

Analysis of the legislative changes in support of children with SEN and their families:

Strategies to include parents in the education process along with the other professional agencies

The significance of the parent professional relationship is thought to be unchallenged among the policies related to the SEN. When the parents are involved in the process of the education of SEN children, they get overwhelmed with the varied flow of suggestions that are provided to them. While dealing with their children, the families may need extra support and at that time they turn up to the different professional agencies. They help the parents to remain up to dated with the several pieces of information regarding the variety of services offered. The overall interactions help to reduce the stress level of the parents and helps in the improvement of the child. The information provided can be utilised to evaluate whether the child is suffering from any special conditions, evaluates the child’s outcome summary process (COS), the eligibility for providing the specific services are also considered and ultimately targeting goals for the individualised education programmes (IEP). After this the team of professionals and the families may combine together to assess the outcome of the programme, all together may develop newer outcomes which sets the pathway of the required services. The children with their professionals may attend the program accompanied by their local education agency (LEA). This helps in the development of a strong effective relationship with the families of the children and allows the children to express them freely and encourages them in the participation (McWilliam, 2010; Reed, and Murphy, 2011). As per the guidelines of the Children and Families Act, 2014 the local authorities should aim to provide the combined support of the agencies to augment the education and the well being of the child with SEN. The high quality and the personalised way of teaching will justify the needs of the individual children and young people as per the section 21 of the Children and Families Act, 2014 (Department for Education, 2006). The introduction of technology of “Parentmail” and “Tapestry” increases the involvement of the parents in the teaching approach and this can be applied for the above mentioned case. The Parentmail is an online based technology to involve the parents with the school. It can be accessed as an app on the mobile phone or through the desktop of the computer. Various activities can be conducted such as emailing, sending text messages; consent for activities, booking slots for the parents, notifying the absence of the child and also accessing the online surveys can be conducted through this system. The “tapestry” is an online journal learning tool which bears many similarities with the social media such as Facebook. The online system allows the educators and the parents to track the progress of the child during the learning sessions and also during the initial developmental stages of the school. The system allows both of them to upload pictures, videos and also communication via messages directly with each other (Cooper, et al, 2013; Fuller, et al, 2017). Several authors had reported that the combined effort of the professional agencies with the parents concerning the education of the child showed an overwhelming impact in comparison to what a school alone could have offered alone (Saggers, et al, 2011). Both the online systems are available as app and therefore the parents can access this regardless of their education level, locations and social status. The conventional concept of interaction with the parents such as the face to face interaction was resulted with lots of limitations such as the letters were lost because of the busy lifestyle of both the parents and teachers that resulted in limited time for interaction and sharing the information. The involvement of the parents concerning the education of the child resulted in various positive outcomes such as their achievements in the academic fields, the increased level of attendance and also the improved level of communication between the parents and professional agencies. After the initiative of the government “excellence in school” 2003 guidance, the involvement of the parents has been considered as a public initiative. This guideline mentioned that parents should be provided with all the information of the children and their opinions should be honoured (Lyons, R. and Roulstone, S., 2018). The professional body had also encouraged the parents to participate in the learning process (Department of Education, 2003; Department For Schools and Families, 2009). According to the SEN code of Practice, 2014 the parents should be treated as an equal partner in the decision making process of learning. It also stated that parents are considered to be the child’s first advocate and their opinions should be given more importance than other specialists (Department of Education, 2014). A most influential theory for parental inclusion was suggested by Epstein, 2009 and it was divided into three stages: Stage 1 is parenting; Stage 2 is communicating; Stage 3 is volunteering; Stage 4 is learning at home; Stage 5 is decision making and ultimately the Stage 6 is about effective communicative collaboration which includes the school, children, family and the community. With the policy of the inclusive education most of the children with SEN are educated within the mainstream education. The approach promotes the concept of inclusive society which is rewarded with countless benefits (SEN and Disability Code of Practice, 2014). The ToolKit also has been designed to guide everybody who are working with the children and the young people with SEN. It offers the daily guidance and therefore can be considered to be as per the SEN code of Practice. It was formulated with the joint efforts of all the professional organisations and peoples who are involved with children and Young People with SEN. It provides the practical suggestions to the early education settings, schools, LEA, health and social services as per the guidance of SEN code of practice (Mankoff, et al, 2010). As per the SEN Code of Practice, 2014 the parents play the major role for supporting the education of the child and the critical factors that counts for the success are: the culture, practice of the management, and the resources which are used to meet the needs of the children, LEA, school and the professional settings which are there to identify early the children with SEN, these agencies should utilize the best practice approach, the views and opinions of the child should be taken into account, the views of the parents should be considered for the best practice approach, the provisions and the progress should be monitored regularly, a cooperation should be maintained among all the agencies for the progress of the child, the LEA should also assess the accorded time limits. The policy of the SEN and LEA promotes the high standard education policy which includes the practice of inclusion with the equal opportunities, promotes the collaborative approaches between the different education settings and the parents and encourages the children with SEN in the decision making process about their course curriculum (SEN and Disability Code of Practice, 2014; Wolfendale, et al, 2013).

The families of the children should be acknowledged and should be asked question about the utility of the instructions and the resources that are provided to them. The school should establish an ongoing communication with the parents via the online modes of communication. The communication journals are also considered to be an excellent method of sustaining the communication. It is sent home with the children and then returned back the day after. With the use of this particular method the teachers can share their important observations and the events to which the families can share their response and the views. It is considered to be a valuable tool for the establishment of consistency between the home and the environment of the education setting for the children with the special needs. The families should be invited to take part in the meetings and to express their views about their children and about the other aspects of life. This helps in the establishment of the culture of the acceptances of diversities.

During the moments of disagreements the professional agencies should remember the following points such as:

The role of the organisation is to support the families of the children with SEN and in the fulfilment of the dreams of the children.

They have to be patient with the behaviour of the children and the families as the SEN children can become very difficult to handle at times and the family members also need time to get experienced with it.

No judgements should be made about the parents and the children

At difficult times trust should be maintained between the families and the agencies to maintain the good equation between them.

The assumptions about working with the families of children should be thoroughly questioned and the other professionals should be urged to do the same.

The educator should consult with different trainers, supervisors and coaches in case of any doubt while working with the families of the children with SEN (Wolfendale, et al, 2013).

The SEN staff members contact the parents and inform them about the positive information for their children every week and this should be given feedback to the head teacher for the planning of the sheets. The approach resulted in the greater achievement of the children and helped in the building up of the casual relationship with their parents. This eventually helps to ease down to conduct the more formal meetings of the children which are very much essential for the well being of the child. Parents have also reported that the approach has reduced the feeling of “dreading the phone call”. Many schools maintain a standard form of letter to contact with the parents and according to the parents this approach is considered to be the best. According to the latest DfES code of Practice (2001:16) stated that the partnership with the parents is the major factor for developing the cordial relationship and augmenting the culture of cooperation between the schools, parents, LEA. The parents should be treated as partners with the other professional agencies in the whole process (Hodge and Runswick‐Cole, 2008).

Methodology Adopted:

This case study is a research methodology that are commonly used in social sciences; a strategy of empirical inquiry that investigates a phenomenon within its real-life context. The data collection methods will include qualitative analysis in the form of participant observation; informal as well as semi-structured interviews and the quantitative data from all the reliable sources will be used.

A Case Study:

The case study included a student who was in the last year of the secondary school of the year 11. To maintain the ethical consideration and anonymity of the child, the child had been referred as Child A. The child had the origin of a White- British and Romany-Gypsy heritage; she stays at home along with her parents and three brothers. The child had been considered as a potential candidate for the case study because she was under the interventions of three child service agencies namely the CAMHS (Child and adolescent mental health services), a social worker and YURT. The child has been diagnosed with Special Education Needs. The mentor of the child taught her for the past 2 years with a session of 2 hours per day, three times a week. The most preferred subject for Child A is Child Development. When the child works upon her preferred subjects, she frequently shares relevant stories specifically upon the development of her younger brother along with her mother’s approach of parenting. The child showed poor grade levels in all subjects which is basically due to her poor attendance rather than the poor capability in the academics.

After the diagnosis of the SEN, the implementation of an Education, Health and Care Plan (EHCP) was adopted mostly on her attitudes towards learning. The child did not like to read, write and preferred to do the most of the work on computer. The handwritten work of the child was with simple and limited detailed sentences and included several punctuation and grammatical errors. The child also revealed a good sense of humour and frequently makes inappropriate sentences purposefully on a non relevant subject that demands to be reported to SENCO. The child showed interest to meet new teen aged boys and enjoyed their company and she always makes a constant effort to get noticed with her loud behaviour and revealing clothes. But when the child was surrounded with any female peers, she had been reported to initiate a problem with them.

The behavioural problems of the child:

The child A was a student at the present school for the past 9 years but she had been referred to the guidance of the specialist specifically because of her unconstructive and non cooperative behaviour with her initial specialist provision. She was reported to use verbal outburst and aggressive behaviour during her academic tasks such as mocking the other peoples, unsuitable conversation about sexual behaviours, drugs and vulgarity. As a consequence to all the above mentioned problems the child was referred to the “tuition service” about six months ago. The tuition service is an academic service on a different location provided by the school itself. Initially the attendance and the punctuality of the child were extremely remarkable but gradually declined which was seriously impacting the scheduled deadlines of the course work of the child. The attitude of the child towards her studies had recently declined as she was very much engrossed with her social life and always switched the topic of studies towards friendship outside the school.

Strategy employed by the educational institute to get in touch with her parents:

When the child did not report to her sessions regularly, the local education agency (LEA), college tried to contact her parents but none of them responded. The college tried to make enquiry about the well being of the child when the child repeatedly missed the sessions of her study. The mother of the child reported that she had a very little contact with her child and therefore was not sure about the whereabouts of her. The mother seemed to be infuriated with the reckless actions of her child and also added that it was not the first time when she went out with her friends. Her mother was able to contact with her child and reported that she was safe. Therefore, the college decided to maintain the contact with her mother about the arrival of her child to her home and also to remain updated about her exact locations.

Recommendations for further research:

Therefore, the mentioned strategies such as Parentmail, Tapestry, Communication Journals or letters should have been used by the professional agencies to involve the parents of the children in the education process. The knowledge of the parents about their child should be utilized by the professional agencies to manage the child properly. The professional agencies will not be able to deal with the child alone without the interventions of their parents as they are the first advocate of their child.

Challenges Faced:

In the triad approach the blame culture exists between the external agencies, professional educators and parents concerning the inadequacy of the fulfilment of the duties of the child. The inclusive practice has its strength and weakness as parents are the closest support to the child and the professionals are provided with the strong knowledge and clinical experience of working in this arena. Apart from the positive outcomes with the involvement of the parents, there are certain cases where the parents may show disinterest and felt glad that the external agencies are taking the burden of their child. Some parents show stereotypic views about their children which should be challenged at that time only. Moreover, the involvement of the parents in the learning process depends on the social and cultural capitals of the families concerned (Trainor, 2010; LaBarbera, 2017). The parents may also show vulnerability about their relationship with the professionals as they constantly fear about offending the professionals with any of their comments which not only destroy the future of the child regarding the access to the support and resources but also making their status as insufficient and abnormal parent in the eyes of the professionals. Therefore, they feel stressed concerning the difficulties they face to face the professionals. They feel pressurized to fulfil the expectations of the professionals. The parents also feel that if they ask any further questions to the professionals they may be referred as “difficult” and therefore feels that their conflict with the professionals is expected. Researchers have also highlighted that parents have the mindset as “We [parents] are good” and “They [professionals] are bad”. The partnership cannot be considered achievable for the professionals as they are against open meetings which will include the parents because of the vociferous pressure of the group of the parents and their domination (Hodge, and Runswick‐Cole, 2008).

Limitations of the Study:

The study was not funded by any funding agency and the time limit for conducting the study was small. Therefore the limitations faced by the researchers are to access the restricted journals and published data available on the electronic database relevant to the search topic.

Conclusion:

The case study was of a child with SEN and the different behavioural patterns showed by the child. The report highlighted about the justification of the research which is on the inclusion of parents along with the other professional agencies during the educational process of the child. The methodology highlighted about several practices that can be applied to solve the above mentioned case. The advantages and drawbacks of the approach were discussed in details.

Continue your exploration of Unveiling the Diversity of Vice Characters with our related content.

References:

Archard, D., 2014. Children: Rights and childhood. Routledge.

Atkinson, M.W., Stott, A. and Doherty, A., P. and Kinder, K. (2002) Multi-Agency Working: A Detailed Study.

Bowers, T. and Wilkinson, D., 1998. The SEN Code of Practice: Is it User‐Friendly?. British Journal of Special Education, 25(3), pp.119-125.

Cheminais, R., 2014. Every Child Matters: A practical guide for teachers. Routledge.

Coates, J. and Vickerman, P., 2010. Empowering children with special educational needs to speak up: experiences of inclusive physical education. Disability and rehabilitation, 32(18), pp.1517-1526.

Code of Practice. Statutory Guidence edn. UK: UK.

Cohen, C.P. and Miljeteig-Olssen, P., 1990. Status report: United Nations convention on the rights of the child. NYL Sch. J. Hum. Rts., 8, p.367.

Cooper, M., O’Hara, M.A.U.R.E.E.N., Schmid, P.F. and Bohart, A.C., 2013. Person-centred therapy today and tomorrow: Vision, challenge and growth. The handbook of person-centred psychotherapy and counselling, pp.1-28.

Czerniawski, G., 2012. Repositioning trust: a challenge to inauthentic neoliberal uses of pupil voice. Management in Education, 26(3), pp.130-139.

DEPARTMENT FOR EDUCATION, 2003. Excellence in schools. Government

DEPARTMENT FOR EDUCATION, 2014. Special Educational Needs and Disability

DEPARTMENT FOR SCHOOLS AND FAMILIES, 2009. Your child, your school,

DfE, 2014. SEN and Disability Code of Practice: Statutory Guidance for Organisations Who Work with and Support Children and Young People with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities.

Edwards, A., Daniels, H., Gallagher, T., Leadbetter, J. and Warmington, P., 2009. Improving inter-professional collaborations: Multi-agency working for children's wellbeing. Routledge.

Epstein, J., 2009. Epstein’s framework of six types of involvement (Including: Sample practices, challenges, redefinitions, and expected results). Baltimore, MD: Center for the Social Organization of Schools.

Flottman, R., McKernan, A. and Tayler, C., 2011. Practice Principles 2: Partnerships with Professionals. Victorian Early Years Learning and Development Framework. Melbourne Graduate School of Education.

Fuller, C., Powell, D. and Fox, S., 2017. Making gains: the impact of outdoor residential experiences on students’ examination grades and self-efficacy. Educational Review, 69(2), pp.232-247.

Gillen, A., 2011. Multi-agency working with children and families: a focus on facilitators and using activity theory principles to explore this topic area (Doctoral dissertation, Newcastle University).

Great Britain. Department for Education, 2006. Working together to safeguard children: A guide to inter-agency working to safeguard and promote the welfare of children. The Stationery Office.

Hodge, N. and Runswick‐Cole, K., 2008. Problematising parent–professional partnerships in education. Disability & Society, 23(6), pp.637-647.

inititative edn. London: UK.

Johnson, E., 2011. The Children's Bill of Emotional Rights: A guide to the needs of children. Jason Aronson.

Kozleski, E.B., Artiles, A.J. and Waitoller, F.R., 2011. Introduction: Equity in inclusive education: Historical trajectories and theoretical commitments. Inclusive education. Examining equity on five continents, pp.1-14.

LaBarbera, R., 2017. Educating Students with Autism Spectrum Disorders: Partnering with Families for Positive Outcomes. SAGE Publications.

Lipkin, P.H. and Okamoto, J., 2015. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) for children with special educational needs. Pediatrics, 136(6), pp.e1650-e1662.

Loreman, T.J., Deppeler, J.M. and Harvey, D.H., 2010. Inclusive education. Supporting diversity in the classroom. Routledge.

Lyons, R. and Roulstone, S., 2018. Listening to the voice of children with developmental speech and language disorders using narrative inquiry: Methodological considerations. Journal of communication disorders, 72, pp.16-25.

Mankoff, J., Hayes, G.R. and Kasnitz, D., 2010, October. Disability studies as a source of critical inquiry for the field of assistive technology. In Proceedings of the 12th international ACM SIGACCESS conference on Computers and accessibility (pp. 3-10).

McWilliam, R.A. ed., 2010. Working with families of young children with special needs. Guilford Press.

Miles, S. and Singal, N., 2010. The Education for All and inclusive education debate: conflict, contradiction or opportunity?. International journal of inclusive education, 14(1), pp.1-15.

Reed, M. and Murphy, A., 2011. Parents and practitioners: improving quality. Implementing Quality Improvement & Change in the Early Years, p.156.

Saggers, B., Hwang, Y.S. and Mercer, K.L., 2011. Your voice counts: Listening to the voice of high school students with autism spectrum disorder. Australasian Journal of Special Education, 35(2), pp.173-190.

Skiba, R., Simmons, A., Ritter, S., Kohler, K., Henderson, M. and Wu, T., 2006. The context of minority disproportionality: Practitioner perspectives on special education referral. Teachers College Record, 108(7), p.1424.

Smith, T.E., Polloway, E.A., Patton, J.R., Dowdy, C.A. and Doughty, T.T., 2015. Teaching students with special needs in inclusive settings. Pearson.

Trainor, A.A., 2010. Reexamining the promise of parent participation in special education: An analysis of cultural and social capital. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 41(3), pp.245-263.

Walker, G., 2018. Working together for children: A critical introduction to multi-agency working. Bloomsbury Publishing.

Wang, X., Xu, M., Zheng, N. and Chen, M., 2008, December. Email conversations reconstruction based on messages threading for multi-person. In 2008 International Workshop on Education Technology and Training & 2008 International Workshop on Geoscience and Remote Sensing (Vol. 1, pp. 676-680). IEEE.

Wolfendale, S., 2013. Working with Parents of SEN Children after the Code of Practice. Routledge. your future. Legislation edn. London: UK.