Children with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities

Lord Bishop of Sheffield Excerpts

Monday 9th December 2024 Lords Chamber

[The Lord Bishop of Sheffield]

My Lords, I thank the noble Baroness for securing this debate. One of the most rewarding pieces of work in which I was involved when I was on the staff of Lichfield Cathedral about 15 years ago was a partnership with a local school for pupils with SEND to create a bespoke multisensory tour involving water, incense, bells, holding crosses and even, judiciously, fire. At first, the cathedral guides were dubious, having been used to providing school visitors simply with a verbal commentary on the history and architecture of the building, but before long they were the ones advocating that the multisensory interactive components be incorporated into all our school visits. The result was a definite uplift in our overall educational offer—and I shall come back to that at the end, if I may.

The Church of England’s National Society for Education has set out a vision for a future curriculum that combines aspiration and equity to support the flourishing of all pupils. Three areas emerge as essential to this vision: first, investment in high capacity and integrated professional services; secondly, access to a broad curriculum for students with SEND; and, thirdly, the need for flexible metrics to evaluate effective teaching.

First, multiagency professional services must be properly funded to provide holistic support to children with SEND. I have in mind the fields of educational psychology, speech and language therapy, occupational therapy and child mental health, all of which have been in decline in recent years. We must ensure an equitable provision for every child, not a postcode lottery wholly reliant on the resources and capacities of overstretched local authorities.

Secondly, we must avoid the assumption that one single approach will suit all students with SEND. The challenges that some experience are cognitive, while others face physical, sensory and social communication barriers. The wide variety of needs and abilities demands in turn a varied curriculum but one that is nevertheless ambitious and in no way dilutes content for students with SEND.

Thirdly, there is a danger of an overreliance on formulaic assessments to measure the success of an educational offering. It is short-sighted to seek to incentivise high-quality and consistent teaching by demanding adherence to a single accountability framework or assessment mechanism. Indeed, each of the latest Ofsted reviews on subject knowledge concludes that there is no single approach that guarantees delivery of a high-quality curriculum.

Finally, in a recent debate, my right reverend friend the Bishop of Lincoln—previously lead bishop for education and chair of the National Society—highlighted the potential of Church-based special schools. Bearing in mind the tremendous constraints on mainstream education and the chronically underfunded and overstretched special education sector, I hope that this possibility will be given serious consideration.

A focus on support for children with SEND is obviously worth while, because those children themselves matter to us. If our experience in Lichfield is any guide, such support is capable of generating learning that can enrich the education that we offer all pupils. That is the reason I am so grateful for this short debate and for the opportunity to contribute to it.