Mainstream schools are not beneficial for all Send children | Letters

I’m pleased that Frances Ryan had a positive experience in mainstream school (Labour’s Send reforms get this right: disabled children in mainstream schools is transformative for everyone, 26 February). Unfortunately, the data shows that this isn’t the case for many disabled children today. Children with special educational needs and disabilities (Send) are five times more likely to be excluded than their peers, and 50% more likely to struggle with attendance. Clearly something is not working for this cohort of children.

My daughter’s experience of mainstream school certainly does not reflect Ryan’s. She has a learning disability and spent a lot of time in the classroom not knowing what was going on. At other times she was taken out to learn by herself with a teaching assistant. Her learning stalled. The Send coordinator said they didn’t have the resources to provide more. It didn’t benefit the other children either, who mostly ignored her and their parents excluded her from social activities. She had one friend – another neurodivergent child.

In 2024, she moved to a special school. She’s grown academically, has a new group of friends and finally feels part of a community. Labour’s plans for more disabled children in mainstream education come with no clarity on how to achieve this. Until they do, parents will remain resistant.
Name and address supplied

As a retired (Send) coordinator and special school headteacher, I read Frances Ryan’s article with admiration. It was humane and a bracing antidote to the political glibness that too often distorts this debate.

Mainstream inclusion can be transformative, but it is not universally appropriate. Some young people need the staffing ratios and carefully structured environments that special schools provide. Sadly, accountability systems continue to disincentivise mainstream-inclusive practice.

Schools that as a matter of moral principle welcomingly admit pupils with complex needs can appear weaker when judged against Ofsted’s narrow attainment metrics. Nor is the system balanced in practice: pupil movement is often a one-way street from mainstream to special, with far less urgency about reintegration back from special when a young person is ready. These issues need addressing to further enhance inclusive practice.

I worry that unempathetic right-of-centre soundbites, if ever translated into policy, could unravel decades of hard-won progress. Ryan’s piece is a timely reminder of what is at stake.
Pete Crockett
Royal Wootton Bassett, Wiltshire

When I read Frances Ryan’s article, I thought of how grateful I was that our son (who is autistic with severe learning difficulties) went to a special school. It was very much a centre of excellence. The classes were small and the teachers were trained in speech therapy. The special schools that David attended are no longer in existence; the expertise lost for ever. Ryan says: “Children with the most complex needs will still be able to attend specialist schools.” Really? Where are they?

The move towards integration is to be welcomed, but let us not forget that disabilities come in many forms, and the latest proposals do nothing for the specialist sector. It is all about money and what you can afford. The race to integrate has starved special schools that were centres of excellence of funding.
John Lawrence
Ulverston, Cumbria