A recent report highlights the impact of inadequate funding for special educational needs and disabilities (Send) provision in England, with schools forced to cut back support. However, this moment should prompt more than concern about diminishing resources; it calls for a fundamental examination of the system that creates these pressures.
Systemic Issues Beyond Funding
Jan Shapiro, headteacher at Addey and Stanhope school in Lewisham, London, leads a school with a significantly higher-than-average proportion of disadvantaged pupils with Send. She emphasizes that inclusion is not an add-on but a commitment embedded in relationships and practice. The issue is not solely financial; it also involves approach, language, culture, and what schools are incentivized to value. Without that foundation, increased funding alone will not deliver what Send children need.
It is welcome that Ofsted has sharpened its focus on inclusion. Yet this sits uneasily alongside performance measures that continue to prioritize attainment outcomes, often without sufficient regard for the complexity of educating vulnerable pupils. This systemic blindness discourages schools from being inclusive, as welcoming Send children may affect their position on league tables. If ministers are serious about inclusion, aligning funding and accountability is essential, but it also requires a more searching examination of the assumptions and culture that shape practice across the system.
Grammar Challenge in an Exam-Obsessed System
Mary Smith from Bearsted, Kent, points to an “exam-obsessed” system that fails to promote communication skills and creativity. Her 10-year-old granddaughter has a revision sheet for upcoming SATs requiring her to differentiate between modal verbs of possibility and certainty, circle determiners, and identify whether conjunctions are subordinating or coordinating. Smith asks how many Guardian readers—or journalists—can tell the difference between the word “since” used as a subordinating conjunction and as a preposition. She questions whether not knowing this has damaged anyone’s career chances or wellbeing.
These letters underscore the need for a broader conversation about the priorities in education, from Send funding to the nature of assessment.
