A Little Learning is a Dangerous Thing: Factors Influencing the Increased Identification of Special Educational Needs from the Perspective of Education Policy-makers and School Practitioners

Abstract

This article considers the increased identification of special educational needs in Australia's largest education system from the perspectives of senior public servants, regional directors, principals, school counsellors, classroom teachers, support class teachers, learning support teachers, and teaching assistants (n = 30). While their perceptions of an increase generally align with the story told by official statistics, participants' narratives reveal that school-based identification of special educational needs is neither art nor science. This research finds that rather than an objective indication of the number and nature of children with special educational needs, official statistics may be more appropriately viewed as a product of funding eligibility and the assumptions of the adults who teach, refer, and assess children who experience difficulties in school and with learning.

A longitudinal analysis of the alignment between children’s early word-level reading trajectories, teachers’ reported concerns and supports provided

“…Evidence suggests teachers are quick to identify children who experience difficulties in school, particularly in the area of behaviour (Hecht & Greenfield, 2002). However, they often find it more difficult to identify specific factors contributing to those behaviours and/or what to do to support children once difficulties have been identified (Graham, 2015). This creates great potential for error in the identification process (Fletcher, Lyon, Fuchs, & Barnes, 2018), which involves analysis of students' presenting characteristics and is therefore vulnerable to latent assumptions about dis/ability, social background, gender, and ethnicity (Meissel, Meyer, Yao, & Rubie-Davies, 2017).…”

Inclusive education in Australia: rhetoric, reality and the road ahead

“…This suggests the trends noted in NSW and Queensland are part of a national phenomenon. Interestingly, this pattern of increasing exclusion from regular school classrooms is occurring without any evidence to support improved educational outcomes for these students (Graham et al ., ), at a time when governments Australia‐wide are committing increased levels of funding to education systems in the name of IE (Graham, in press).…”

“…Governments are injecting more money than ever before into the resourcing of programmes to support student participation and achievement at school (Graham, in press). However, there is no evidence to support the effectiveness of the strategies adopted; on the contrary, the evidence suggests some programmes are having the reverse effect.…”

“…895–896). An increase in the catergorisation and labelling of students has also been linked to increasing rates of exclusion (Graham, in press).…”

“…Slee () contends that this is due to these practices becoming ‘part of the order of things’ (p. 897). Teacher education – ‘teachers are seen as needing better preparation for inclusive education’ (Forlin et al ., , p. 5), and while some universities now offer units in IE (Berlach and Chambers, ), further research is needed to ensure that universities continue to grow and improve their courses (Varcoe and Boyle, ). Categorisation and labelling – despite evidence of their negative impact on students (Lauchlan and Boyle, , ), both categorisation and labelling of students are on the increase (Slee, ). Graham (in press) argues that the current reliance on categorisation and labelling to allocate resources is placing undue pressures on medical professionals to diagnose. As a result, ‘labels proliferate and some children receive several’ (p. 14).…”