“The path ahead requires honesty about these challenges while maintaining hope for solutions. This research provides that honesty. It shows us a profession that cares deeply about vulnerable pupils but needs practical support to serve them well. Teachers are sounding the alarm.”
Duncan Verry, Bett
In all the ongoing speculation about the Government’s plans to reform the system for supporting children and young people with SEND, and analysis of what this might mean, the voices of teachers haven’t so far been especially prominent. This is despite our own warnings that the impact of SEND policy changes on mainstream schools is likely to be huge.
However, an insight has now been provided into how the prospect of SEND reform is perceived by the teachers and school leaders who will have to make it work. The polling company YouGov has carried out a nationally representative survey of 1,023 teachers and school leaders on behalf of Bett UK, the annual education technology exhibition.
The report published today presents a picture of despair. With a Schools White Paper imminent, and councils warning of impending bankruptcy, teachers are clear that the current system for supporting children with SEND isn’t working. But they appear to have little enthusiasm for the solutions that are likely to be presented by ministers.
Loss of faith in policy-makers
While nine in 10 teachers believe the current system isn’t working, this doesn’t translate into enthusiasm for reforms that are expected to put the onus firmly on mainstream schools to support more children with a wider range of needs.
The report acknowledges this apparent contradiction, suggesting, “teachers have lost faith not just in current arrangements but in the capacity of policy interventions to improve outcomes”. As indeed have the parents and families of children and young people with SEND.
Two-thirds of teachers say they are concerned at the prospect of more pupils with SEND in mainstream schools with insufficient support. To which the only possible response can be: what the heck are the other one-third on, and can we have some of it?
Gap between policy aspirations for inclusion and classroom realities
The theme is one of a lack of resources in classrooms to turn policy aspirations into a reality for children with SEND who need extra support. The narrative goes that teachers and school leaders want to be inclusive and want to help every child succeed, but can’t do it under the current financial circumstances. The report’s introduction describes “a workforce caught between idealistic policy and practical reality”.
It paints a picture of teachers grappling with the “social benefits” of more inclusive classrooms on the one hand, and the “academic costs” of this on the other. In other words, while 64% of teachers think including pupils with SEND in mainstream schools is good for everyone’s social skills and empathy levels, 49% believe the academic outcomes of pupils without SEND are made worse by having pupils who require extra support in the same classroom.
It reminds me of the time around a decade ago when, in the course of my work as a (different) charity policy officer, I met a backbench Labour MP, now a very senior member of the Government. We were to discuss support for autistic children in mainstream primary schools. I thought he shared my interest in making schools as supportive as possible for all children. But the question he wanted an answer to was why mainstream schools should be expected to take a hit like this to their attainment figures. It’s clearly a widely shared view.
A small majority (53%) of teachers believe academic outcomes are also worse for pupils with SEND when they are educated in mainstream schools. The concern is particularly acute around children’s ability to focus and pay attention, with 69% of teachers believing their ability to concentrate suffers in mainstream settings. Teachers also have “practical concerns”, with 80% saying they find it difficult to teach pupils with SEND alongside pupils without SEND in their lessons.
Over or under-diagnosis?
The question du jour of whether children are over-diagnosed or under-diagnosed with SEND makes an appearance in the survey. Of course it does—every man and his dog has an opinion on the subject at the moment.
Nearly a third (31%) of teachers (particularly in secondary schools) expressed the view that SEND is over-diagnosed in schools. This is cancelled out by the 33% of teachers (particularly in primary) who say children are under-diagnosed.
Both things can’t be true, so I’m not sure this tells us anything useful, beyond being very cautious indeed about allowing teachers to determine such things by themselves. Teachers should be able to identify when a child has barriers to learning and should know what steps to take. The law is clear that a child should receive support based on their particular needs, not based on a specific diagnosis.
Nonetheless, it’s interesting that 42% of teachers believe disadvantaged pupils are more likely to be incorrectly labelled as having SEND, suggesting schools face challenges in distinguishing between genuine learning difficulties and barriers created by socio-economic disadvantage.
Hopes outweighed by fears
The survey shows teachers’ hopes for improvement are far outweighed by their fears of what SEND reform might mean. Their dominant fears are around capacity and support.
“This reflects teachers’ lived experience of inclusion without adequate resources, and their belief that expanding mainstream provision without addressing underlying support deficits will simply spread existing problems more widely.”
Other concerns expressed by teachers about the prospect of SEND reform include reduced funding for mainstream schools, inadequate training for teaching staff and increased pressure on special school places. Our own concern at Special Needs Jungle that pupils with the greatest needs will be overlooked by policy-makers is shared by 22% of teachers.
Teachers were asked what they thought the priorities should be for helping them support pupils with SEND more effectively. While 65% say “additional teaching assistant support in the classroom” and 58% say “smaller class sizes”, only 25% say they want better access to specialist external support services, and only 22% say they need more specialist training.
These latter figures seem surprisingly low, suggesting more confidence among teachers in their own SEND expertise than we would have expected. But the report does identify a “training gap”, with 36% of survey respondents saying that school staff are not adequately prepared for increased SEND responsibilities.
“This training gap becomes critical if mainstream schools are expected to serve pupils previously educated in specialist settings.”
Overcoming teachers’ scepticism
Policy-makers should be perturbed that, even before the detail of SEND reform is known, teachers—who are the ones who have to make schools work for children—are so unconvinced that anything will improve. The report’s authors are keen to stress that teachers’ scepticism about SEND reform “is not ideological opposition but practical concern born from daily experience of an already stretched system”.
Rather than system reform, teachers want something much more practical: additional teaching assistant support, smaller class sizes and improved facilities. Teachers, school leaders and all their representative bodies need to be absolutely clear with ministers at this point about what is achievable in mainstream schools within existing resources.
For their part, ministers need to work much harder at understanding why teachers and parents are so fearful of reform plans. Like parents, teachers are “[aware] that reform may be driven more by financial necessity than educational vision”. The educational vision should be one where every child has the support they need to succeed and thrive in school, without parents having to turn themselves inside out to secure the help that’s theirs by right.
Read the repoBy almost any metric, SEND Safety Valve has failed, but you’d never guess from this entirely unbiased reportrt here
Disabled Children’s Rights are Under Attack.
We’re fighting, but we can’t do it alone: we need your help more than ever.
We’re volunteer-run, but costs are rising. To help us keep going, please consider a one-off or, if it’s possible, a regular donation.
Read more about being a regular donor here.
We use Zeffy to fundraise, which doesn’t charge us a fee, so 100% of your donation reaches us.
Also read:
- Why nurture groups and effective nurture practice are vital for whole school inclusion
- Plans for SEND delayed to Autumn, but Spending Review doesn’t include enough for widescale change
- EHCPs 2025 show a 22.5% rise in pupils “educated elsewhere” than in schools. Plus, check out our annual LA Hall of Shame
- Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill: Protecting children or punishing parents?
- By almost any metric, SEND Safety Valve has failed, but you’d never guess from this entirely unbiased report
- Beyond EHCPs: Why Inclusion Needs More Than a Document
- The Unacceptable Truth: 20 SEND legal rights at risk from the Government’s SEND reforms
- How health and family support systems are failing children starting school
- WEBINAR RECORDING! The implications for children’s legal rights to EHCPs and EOTAS of the Government’s SEND proposals
- When things go right: Shining a light on SEND Practitioners making a positive impact [Giveaway!]
- From suspicion to support: why the Government’s child protection reforms matter for disabled children
- Have your say on the future of transport for disabled children and young people
- Unison voices major concerns over SEND reform health plans for sick and disabled children out of school in the EOTAS consultation
- Top Tips for the EOTAS & EHCP consultation: Protect your child’s rights to statutory SEND support
- Navigating constraints: Why a former PCF chair thinks the current model is missing the mark for families
- Dear Secretary of State for Education, Lucy Powell: an Open Letter from Special Needs Jungle and SEND legal charity SOS!SEN
- Research: Disabled young people define inclusive education as “learning in the place that’s right for them”
What kind of government is “bold” enough to scrap statutory EHCPs from vulnerable children?May 16, 2025
The SEND reforms in the Schools White Paper reveal rights given, and rights stripped awayFebruary 24, 2026
Don’t miss a thing!
Don’t miss any posts from SNJ – simply add your email address below. You must click the link in the confirmation email you’ll receive to activate your free subscription.
You can also keep up with us by following our
Want more? Be an SNJ regular donor!
SNJ is a non-profit and everyone who writes here does so voluntarily. We need your support to help us with costs by donating once or as a regular patron. Find out more here
The path ahead requires honesty about these challenges
while maintaining hope for solutions. This research
provides that honesty. It shows us a profession that cares
deeply about vulnerable pupils but needs practical support
to serve them well. Teachers are sounding the alarm.
When her younger daughter was diagnosed with Rett Syndrome in 2009 shortly before her second birthday, Catriona found herself dealing in practice with things she’d previously thought she understood in principle.
She juggles her work as policy manager for a national charity with caring and advocating for her daughter. She's passionate about improving the lives of disabled children and their families, and making the systems that should support them work more transparently and equitably.
Catriona writes for Special Needs Jungle in a personal capacity, and all views expressed are her own.
- “Why would anyone in government think that was an okay idea?” #SaveSENDLegalRights - May 12, 2026
- The SEND reform reality check: Why experts’ and policymakers’ concerns are growing under scrutiny - April 15, 2026
- MPs warn “unsustainable” SEND transport system fails families with disabled young people - March 6, 2026
Please share this article!
Discover more from Special Needs Jungle
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
