Briefing Paper

by Janet Beales Kaidantzis

March 2000

by Janet Beales Kaidantzis
March 2000

• Background 
• The Law on Special Education 
• Special Education Spending 
• Special Schools 
• Policy Issues 
• Conclusion 
• Appendix: Centre Academy

In Great Britain, the 1870 Education Act marked the direct involvement of the state in education. Previously, education had been left to the Voluntary Church Societies. The 1870 Act, established during the reign of Queen Victoria, set up a system of local school boards with the power to provide schooling paid by taxpayers. In 1880 compulsory education was law and became free in 1891.

It was not until 1981, however, that children with special needs were specifically protected under the Education Act approved by Parliament. The U.K. generally lags behind the U.S. in the provision of special education and the recognition and identification of disabilities, particularly learning disabilities and attention deficit disorders.

The British system of classifying students for purposes of determining service levels is quite different than in the United States. In the U.S., all students whose disability interferes with their ability to learn are entitled to the same statutory protections and procedures under the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). In particular, all students have access to a Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) and, to varying degrees, the funding needed to deliver it. Roughly 12 percent of U.S. students receive special education under the IDEA.

In the U.K., however, there are two completely different eligibility categories, which ultimately determine the student’s access to services, funding, and legal protections. These two categories are informally referred to as "Statemented" and "Non-Statemented" students. Since individual Local Education Authorities (or LEAs, the equivalent of school districts in the U.S.) determine a student’s eligibility for a Statement, it is possible for two students with the exact same needs to find themselves eligible for entirely different levels of service (e.g. one is granted a Statement; the other is not). Eligibility for Statements is highly restrictive; just 2 percent of British students (217,000 children in England and Wales) have Statements, the statutory equivalent of American IEPs. The 18-20 percent of children with special needs who are not eligible for Statements do receive some special education services, but not to the same extent as Statemented students.

Britain’s special education policy is far more restrictive than U.S. laws when it comes to providing intensive special education services and identifying students with moderate to severe needs. However, its policy acknowledges that a larger proportion of students (18-20 percent versus the 12 percent of U.S. students with IEPs) have some special needs, which it attempts to meet through limited special education services provided in the regular classroom. This two-tier approach is the key difference between the special education policies of the U.S. and the U.K.

Children with special educational needs are defined in law as having special educational needs by virtue of their having learning difficulties and/or disabilities which call for educational provision in addition to that normally made for children of their age in schools. The law defines two categories of children with special educational needs.

The first and largest is the group of children with special educational needs whose needs can be and are met from the resources available to their mainstream school. The school governors (similar to our school boards, but at the school level not the district level) must make their "best endeavors" to ensure that an appropriate education is provided to children with special educational needs.

The second category of children are those whose special educational needs cannot be met by resources available to their school. Their right to special education is protected by law and places the responsibility on the Local Education Authorities (LEA) to identify children with special educational needs, to assess those who have or probably have special educational needs, then to issue Statements for those whose needs are confirmed.

The LEA has a duty to assess any child who has or probably has a disability.

As part of that assessment, the duty to obtain written advice from professionals, including an educational psychologist, a medical professional and a head teacher, on a child's needs and the appropriate provision to meet them.

If the child is found to have a special educational need, the LEA has a duty to issue a Statement of Special Educational Needs which must list all of the special educational needs identified and specify the special educational provision required to meet them.

Once the Statement is issued, the LEA is responsible for providing or arranging for the services specified. The LEA is also responsible for paying for these services and, like the U.S., can not use cost as a reason to withhold services.

Parents may appeal against the LEA’s decision through the Special Education Needs (SEN) Tribunal.

Each individual child who is the subject of a Statement has a legal entitlement to receive the special educational provision his or her needs call for. This entitlement is unlimited and, as a consequence, can create significant cost control problems for the LEAs. While LEAs are at liberty to try to persuade another body (e.g. a Health Authority or school) to provide and pay for special education, or find the least expensive way of providing service, ultimately the responsibility of payment falls on the LEA. As in the U.S., there is a wide disparity in what individual LEAs spend on children with apparently similar needs, according to a recent Coopers & Lybrand report on the issue.

Since LEAs are responsible for both identification of special-needs students and payment for services, one way they have attempted to control costs is by limiting the number of students with Statements. Unlike the U.S., where disability categories are fairly well established and virtually all children who have a disability which interferes with their learning are given an IEP, Britain gives LEAs broad discretion in defining which group or groups of children have special educational needs requiring Statements.

For a child to be issued a Statement, he or she must pass through a series of five "stages" as outlined by the Department for Education’s Code of Practice. In many cases, action taken at one stage will mean that the child will not have to move to the next. If a child’s needs can be met at any one of the lower stages (1-3), he or she will not be issued a Statement and instead may be placed on his or her school’s Special Needs Roster by way of identification.

Stage 1: Teachers identify a child’s special educational needs, consult with the school’s Special Educational Needs (SEN) coordinator, and take initial action (modifying school work, etc.).

Stage 2: The school’s SEN coordinator takes lead responsibility for gathering information and coordinating the child’s special education working with the child’s teachers.

Stage 3: Teachers and the SEN coordinator are supported by specialists from outside the school.

Stage 4: The LEA considers the need for a statutory assessment and, if appropriate, makes a multi-disciplinary assessment.

Stage 5: The LEA considers the need for a Statement and, if appropriate, makes a Statement and arranges, modifies, and reviews the provision of special education services.

According to one SEN coordinator at a mainstream school, this five-stage practice is a cumbersome process. "It takes a long time to go through the stages; there is no leapfrogging. In some cases, it takes two years to get a Statement—that’s a loss of important education years…You must prove you are a failure. You must fail in order to get a Statement."

As public policy, the five-stage process is intended to foster the provision of special education when and where its needed, early identification, mainstreaming, coordination between home and school, and last of all, cost control. In practice, the five-stage process seems to be most effective in controlling costs and keeping students in a mainstream environment (where their needs may or may not be adequately met).

One private specialized school director believes the five-stage process is used primarily as a tool for cost control rather than for adequately serving students with special needs. His belief is substantiated by the SEN coordinator who says that in her LEA, there is a Statementing Fund. "Last year, the LEA overspent on Statemented students, so there is not enough money for students who are currently seeking Statements." She believes the LEA has a strong financial incentive to limit the number of students with Statements, regardless of the severity of the student’s needs. She says the five-stages "force you to help the child in school without (much) extra money." Funding for special needs students tends not to encroach on funds for regular education because LEAs, unlike public schools in the U.S., are not mandated to provide a Free Appropriate Public Education regardless of cost.

As in the United States, the LEA and the individual school exercise great discretion in how much money they allocate for special education at the local level. A study commissioned by the Department for Education and Employment found that the cost of educating similar pupils varied considerably from school to school. For example, the cost of educating a child with mild disabilities ranged from $2,800 to $16,000 (£1,700 to £9,700). The total cost of special education in the U.K. is unknown and difficult to estimate. A recent estimate, however, places special-education spending for England and Wales at $4 billion (£2.5 billion). This estimate is based on government recommended levels of spending on special education and may not reflect actual costs. (By comparison, the U.S. spent approximately $32 billion for special education, excluding indirect costs, in 1994. Note: due to accounting differences, these two figures may not be strictly comparable.)

On a per pupil basis, rough estimates for special-education costs are as follows: However, as in the U.S., spending on special education varies widely among LEAs.

The term "special schools" refers to schools specializing in the education of students with disabilities and includes both private and public institutions. The number of special schools in England has steadily declined from roughly 1,600 in 1979 to 1,200 in 1999. Likewise, the number of full-time students enrolled in special schools has fallen from 130,000 to just over 95,000 over the same time period. Reasons for the decline include full inclusion, high transportation costs, and lack of teachers with specialized qualifications.

Most special schools are publicly owned and operated; many are co-located as a separate unit within a public school. The Gabbitas Guide to Schools for Special Needs 1999, which covers primarily private or independent schools, lists 192 private special schools in England, 29 in Scotland, 5 in Wales, and 1 in Northern Ireland. For the most part, tuition at these schools is paid by the students’ parents, though in some cases, the LEA will fund tuition for students in a private or independent school.

The key difference between U.S. and British special education policy centers on how eligibility for services is determined. Britain uses a two-tier approach to special-education classification with corresponding differences in legal protections and access to funding and services. Any student may be entered onto a school’s Special Needs Roster without formal assessment. However, only those students deemed to have needs severe enough that they can not be met in the regular classroom are granted Statements. By contrast, students identified as having special needs in the U.S. are all treated the same before the law, and in theory if not always in practice, are guaranteed a free, appropriate, public education.

There are several consequences arising from Britain’s classification system—some favorable and some detrimental from the standpoint of effective, efficient special education policy.

Concentrates available resources on the most severely disabled students

More fluidity, of students and instructional resources, between special education and regular education.

Encourages solutions to be found as close to the mainstream setting as possible in the most economical way possible.

Imposes strong cost controls on special education.

Prevents encroachment into funds for general education since LEAs control the number of students receiving Statements and budget accordingly.

Limits LEA exposure to liability for statutory violations since relatively few special needs students are entitled to extra legal protections that Statemented status confers.

Potentially under serves or neglects students with special needs.

Can violate public perceptions of "fairness" and equality of treatment.

Limits schools’ ability to provide adequate, early intervention.

Potentially delays needed services while student progresses through the 5 stages.

One benefit of the five-stage process is that special education in Britain is treated more as a revolving door with students able to access limited special-education services at various times throughout their school careers. There are not strong incentives to remain on a school’s Special Education Roster. The status affords no legal protections or guarantee of extra resources so students are more likely to come off the Roster when they no longer require special services. One SEN director estimated that over the course of their school life, roughly 25 percent of students who receive special services eventually go off her school’s Special Education Roster. Presumably, this system is less stigmatizing to students (and less costly) than the U.S. system where the special education designation often remains with the student throughout his or her school years.

Similarly, the relatively small number of students with Statements (2%) rarely relinquish their SEN status. These students tend to have more severe needs, which is why they were given Statements in the first place. Furthermore, relinquishing the Statement would cause the student to lose the statutory protections and funding that come with it.

The number of appeals brought before the SEN Tribunal each week indicates that many parents feel their special needs children are being under served due to problems determining eligibility for special services, particularly Statements. In 1995-96, there were an average of 35 appeals cases a week brought to the SEN Tribunal. The complaints pertained to the following:

Contents of Statement: 37%

Refusal to assess: 24%

Refusal to make a Statement: 16%

Against school named in Statement: 12.5%

From this information, one can see that 40 percent of the appeals were due to disagreements over the child’s need for special services. In the U.S. appeals tend to focus more on the services provided or the type of placement, rather than whether or not the child is eligible for special education. This indicates that large numbers of parents are dissatisfied with the way eligibility for services is determined.

This briefing paper does not attempt to determine which system of special education produced the best outcomes for students and taxpayers. Rather it briefly describes and analyses key policy differences in an effort to illuminate possible approaches to special education policy. Both countries have done much to address the needs of special learners, but neither country has succeeded in creating a policy that is both cost effective and meets the needs of students with disabilities. The U.S. struggles with cost control issues and encroachment, while the UK’s policies raise questions about the adequacy of services provided and the numbers of children eligible for more intensive levels of service. Both countries are grappling with the challenges of mainstreaming and full inclusion, outcomes measurement, and how to create successful life outcomes for students with disabilities through special education in school.

On October 13, 1999 I visited Centre Academy on the outskirts of London and met with its headmaster, Fin O’Regan. Tel. 0171-738-2344. Centre Academy also has seven similar programs in Florida.

Centre Academy enrolls 45 students ages 8 to 18, half of whom are Americans and half are British. Tuition at this day school averages £12,000 (about $19,500) and all but eight of the students are paid for privately. The eight students have "Statements" and are publicly paid for by their LEA. Centre Academy charges a £2,000 surcharge above tuition for these students due to added demands for services (counseling, etc.) by the LEA. All three "schools" are housed in the same modest, two-story building, which has a science lab and art-room annex in back.

Lower school tuition $18,000 £11,000
Middle school tuition $19,000 £11,500
Upper school tuition $19,800 £12,000

The staff is a mix of British and Americans reflecting the student population. While they are not required by law to have teaching certificates, nearly all of them do because the presence of the eight Statemented students results in LEA visiting the school, and according to Mr. O’Regan, the LEA prefers that the school follow the same standards as LEA schools.

Center Academy was started by Mack Hicks about 25 years ago as an outgrowth of the special-education diagnostic services he was providing in the London area. Initially the school was part of the Developmental Center, a charitable trust. But now it is an independent organization.

I asked Mr. O’Regan why a parent would want to enroll a child at Centre Academy rather than in the LEA mainstream school. He indicated that the U.K. is behind the U.S. in educating learning disabled students. The largest recognized learning disability in the U.K. is dyslexia and consequently, the state curriculum is geared to educating dyslexics. For the most part, teachers in LEA schools are not trained to teach to different learning styles. While full inclusion is the big trend, teachers in LEA schools generally have not been given additional training or resources to cope with inclusion. ADHD is not widely recognized and Mr. O’Regan spends a lot of time speaking on the subject and participating on committees to raise awareness. Parents are not well organized to advocate for LD (except dyslexia). Centre Academy offers smaller classes, handles different learning styles, and takes on the LD student "with some edges." Centre Academy’s approach is academic (not clinical, though its roots are clinical). Centre Academy uses the counseling services and the testing services of the Developmental Centre Academy.

Ritalin is generally not prescribed for ADHD students, says Mr. O’Regan. He says there is a strong anti-medication lobby, and Ritalin is listed in the pharmacology index for only a narrowly defined population.

Centre Academy is not an ADHD school, but because of Mr. O’Regan’s activity in this area, it is getting the reputation for that. Centre Academy does not accept students with moderate to serious behavior problems. Mr. O’Regan says there is a real need in the U.K. for schools that serve the LD student with more intense behavior problems. He says students who are not appropriate for his program have nowhere to go; an EBD (emotionally and behaviorally disturbed) school placement is totally inappropriate for these students, yet they need more structure and behavior management than he can provide.

One of the challenges of serving an American and British student population is that the academic requirements are quite different at the upper school. (Students receive the same general curriculum at the lower and middle schools.) In the upper school, there are two tracks. The Americans have a college bound curriculum, attend the school until age 18, and nearly 100% of the graduates go onto college, according to Mr. O’Regan. The British students generally leave Centre Academy at age 16. Their curriculum focuses on preparing them for the GCSE, a series of about 10 difficult tests that they take at age 16. (The A-levels, which are administered at age 18 and which contain college-level content, are too advanced for most Centre Academy students. Instead of preparing for these exams, the students leave school at age 16 and go into vocational programs.) Mr. O’Regan is critical about this aspect of the British education system, particularly its reliance on standardized tests as the gatekeeper to continuing education. He strongly prefers the U.S. diploma system, which is more accommodating for LD students.

The big trend in special education is full inclusion. The inclusion movement in the U.K. is not as advanced in the U.S. and may be as much as five years behind the U.S. in terms of implementation. Among educators, the media, and policy makers, there is a lot of optimism about the promise of full inclusion, but not a lot of teacher training or support. Mr. O’Regan thinks that it will be tried, and found inadequate; specialized schools that might be closing now will open again in the future. The effect of full inclusion on private special schools, according to Mr. O’Regan, is that many schools who primarily enrolled Statemented students in the past are now enrolling more private-tuition students as the number of students placed by LEAs falls.

###

Janet Beales Kaidantzis is an independent education researcher. She can be contacted at jbeales@logantele.com

CER Home Page Education Industry   E-Mail CER CER Publications