Children and young people with special educational needs and disabilities and their families are likely to be significantly affected by the Covid-19 pandemic at various levels, particularly given the implementation of school closures during national lockdowns. This study employed a survey design to assess parental perspectives on the impact of school closures and of returning to school in England, as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic. Eighty-three parents of children and young people with various types of need responded to the survey between September and December 2020. The survey included multiple choice questions and open-ended questions for further in-depth examination of parental perspectives. Results show that: the majority of parents reported that school closures had a detrimental effect on their children’s mental health (particularly those from the most deprived neighbourhoods) and on their own mental and physical health (particularly for ethnically diverse parents and for those whose children attend specialized settings); returning to school was considered to have a positive impact on children’s mental and physical health for the vast majority of parents, despite fearing exposure to the virus; many parents have reported that their children were calmer and happier at home during school closures and became more anxious and stressed upon returning to school. The role of cumulative risk in these children and families, as well as the role of schools as key support agents for the most vulnerable are discussed with implications for future research and policy.

In England, the Children and Families Act 2014 has been regarded as the most radical change in the Special Educational Needs and Disability provision for decades. Building on the recommendations of the Warnock report and subsequent 1981 Education Act, the 2014 Act introduced the Education Health and Care plans to replace the Statements of Special Educational Needs, with the view to promote holistic and participation-focused provision. This study aimed to examine and compare the quality of the Education Health and Care plans developed in some of the most deprived and some of the most affluent regions in England, with a particular focus on young children, given the well-documented instrumental role of early childhood intervention. The Education Health and Care plans of 71 children aged 4-8 years old were gathered and a systematic analysis of the needs and outcomes reported in those plans was conducted. Results show that the pattern of needs is similar across diagnostic categories, with the exception of mobility needs. However, more affluent local authorities provide more detailed descriptions of certain types of needs (related to mental functions and sensory functions) and higher quality outcomes. Special settings also present more detailed descriptions of some needs than mainstream settings, as well as higher quality outcomes. The higher the number of reported mental functions needs (related to emotional regulation), the higher the quality of the outcomes written for those children. However, the quality of the outcomes is markedly low across plans, local authorities and settings. These results show that the status quo of the Special Educational Needs and Disability policy and provision is still characterized by marked social inequality and specialized work-force disparities, 40 years on from the first Warnock report and the commitment to full inclusion.

A dual approach to mental health in schools has been widely defended, where the assessment of psychological distress and the examination of strengths/well-being are two separate continua. In line with a well-being approach, school belonging has been referenced as an important indicator of mental health in children. This study explored the predictive role of school sense of belonging alongside other demographic variables (gender, main language spoken at home, and socioeconomic status of postcode) on the socio-emotional health profiles of primary school children in England. Children (N = 522) were recruited from three primary schools in Greater London. A survey including measures of school belonging and socio-emotional health was administered to all children. Results showed that it is possible to identify groups of students at primary school level based on socio-emotional health ratings on gratitude, zest, optimism, and perseverance. School sense of membership, as measured by the psychological sense of school membership primary (PSSM-P), was the best predictor of group membership and, together with socioeconomic status, explains 37% of the variance in socio-emotional health profiles. Belonging starts affecting well-being and socio-emotional health as early as in primary school, hence the importance of universal screening and early preventive actions to promote well-being in this age range. The study provides evidence supporting the use of the abbreviated (PSSM-P) in predicting socio-emotional health profiles, with potential to complement distress-based measures.

How to cite:Please refer to published version for the most recent bibliographic citation information. If a published version is known of, the repository item page linked to above, will contain details on accessing it.

The implementation of social distancing measures (e.g., school closures) by governments worldwide to prevent the spread of COVID-19 has affected millions of children and their families. However, the consequences of such measures on the wellbeing of children with special educational needs (SEN) and their caregivers are not fully understood. The present study examined the socioemotional wellbeing and daily habits of children between 5 and 12 years old with SEN during the first national COVID-19 lockdown in the United Kingdom. Participants were 995 caregivers between 18 and 61 years old living in the United Kingdom who completed a 20 -min electronic survey on child and family wellbeing distributed via social networks between July and August 2020. The findings showed that children with SEN were more likely to experience more emotional and behavioral difficulties during the lockdown than children without SEN. Children with SEN but without mental health difficulties did not have more behavior difficulties during the lockdown than children without SEN. There was a significant increase in screen time and decrease in sleep time for children with and without SEN during the lockdown, but children with SEN were using screens more often than children without SEN both before and during the lockdown. Finally, caregivers with children with SEN reported more difficulty with the confinement than caregivers with children without SEN, but caregiver and child poor mental health were likely to explain the difference. The findings show that the wellbeing of children with SEN was more likely to be negatively affected by the lockdown than the wellbeing of children without SEN. Caregiver and child mental health were likely to explain the differences.