In recent years there has been a pressure to introduce an indirect “consultative model” to working with children with speech and language needs. It is favoured by educationists because it avoids the need to take children out of class and embeds any support children received in the curriculum. This paper reports the results of a recent study which indicates that Speech and Language Therapists are concerned about the universal application of this model of service delivery. It introduces and discusses a number of interrelated factors which need to be in place before the consultative model can be successfully introduced.

Support for children with special educational needs (SEN) in inclusive classrooms, in many countries, continues to be provided by teaching assistants (TAs). Whilst they frequently take responsibility for instruction, they are rarely adequately trained and prepared. As TAs have ample opportunities for individualised and group interactions, this paper recommends scaffolding as the key theory to inform their practice. From a large dataset of interactions in mathematics and literacy lessons, episodes of TA scaffolding were selected. Using conversation analysis, three scaffolding roles emerged: 1) a support role that maintained learner engagement, on-task behaviour and motivation; 2) a repair function that focused on learning and fostered independence when children were in difficulty; and c) a heuristic role that encouraged students to use their own learning strategies. The paper concludes with implications for trainers and managers and how teachers can support TAs in implementing each role.

Services for children with speech and language needs in England and Wales are in a period of change. The context is subject to major systemic pressures deriving from government policies. These include the development of inclusive education and encouragement of multiprofessional collaboration in policy development and practice ('joined up thinking'). In addition, structures at local level are changing with the establishment of unitary authorities and the change from Health Trusts to Primary Care Trusts. Professional practice is also changing with a shift from clinical to community settings for speech and language therapists working with children. The present study reports on a survey sponsored by the Department for Education and Employment, Department of Health and the Welsh Assembly to identify the nature of speech and language therapy (SLT) services provided to education in England and Wales. The sample comprised all SLT service managers (n = 133, response rate 74%). The results indicate that services vary greatly in size and in their SLT: child ratio, with a mean of one SLT to 4257 child population. The caseload was highest for the 5-10 age group, and service delivery was targeted at these children, with low levels of work with secondary aged pupils. Most provision in educational settings was made to mainstream schools, but the provision of SLT time per child was substantially higher in specialist language resources. Apart from the preschool phase, most SLT provision was for children with statements of special educational needs. Prioritization of service delivery was usually by severity of need. The provision of bilingual SLT services was very limited, with only 14.0 full-time equivalents SLTs fluent in a community language, other than Welsh, where proportionately availability was much greater. Most LEAs funded SLT posts, although these were usually employed as part of the SLT service, with only about 10% of LEAs employing SLTs direct. However, 55.5% of SLT managers reported that recruitment and retention were problematic, resulting in gaps in the service. These findings are discussed with respect to changes driven by professional judgements on the nature of optimal service delivery, and government policy, with particular reference to inclusion and equity of service delivery.

Support for children with special educational needs in inclusive classrooms is increasingly provided by teaching assistants (TAs). They often have a direct pedagogical role, taking responsibility for instruction in mathematics. The quality of TAs' oral skills is crucial for learning but has rarely been researched. Using conversation analysis, this study compares teacher and TA talk in terms of turn allocation, topic generation and repair. From 130 recordings, transcripts of mathematics teaching in four lessons were analysed in depth. We found that teachers open up students whilst TAs close down the talk. Teachers, with whole classes, adopt inclusive teaching strategies to ensure oral participation whereas TAs, working with individuals, emphasise task completion. Teachers use open strategies for topic generation whilst TAs ask closed questions. Teachers withhold correction with prompts and hints whilst TAs supply answers. The findings are interpreted with reference to the TA role and implications for management and training.

In this article, James Law, Marie Gascoigne and Nina Soloff, of the Department of Language and Communication Science at City University, London; Geoff Lindsay and Sue Band, of the Institute of Education, University of Warwick; and Nick Peacey and Julie Radford, of the Institute of Education, University of London, explore provision for children with speech and language needs. The authors report the outcomes of Government‐funded research into the provision of speech and language therapy services and identify 13 key themes which emerge from a review of these findings. They proceed to make a series of important and challenging recommendations, many of which focus on the need for enhanced collaboration at a range of levels.