Supporting Every Learner: Approaches to Special Educational Needs (SEN/SPED) in the UK and US

by

Introduction
Ensuring that students with disabilities receive an appropriate education tailored to their unique needs is a crucial aspect of modern, inclusive education systems. Both the United Kingdom and the United States have established legal frameworks and systems designed to identify, assess, and support children and young people with Special Educational Needs (SEN) or disabilities (often termed Special Education or SPED in the US). While the overarching goals of inclusion and providing necessary support are similar, the specific terminology, processes, funding mechanisms, and challenges encountered differ between the two countries. This article compares the approaches to supporting students with SEN/SPED in the UK and US education systems.

The UK System: Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND)
The framework for supporting children and young people aged 0-25 with SEN or disabilities in England is primarily defined by the Children and Families Act 2014 and the associated SEND Code of Practice.

  • Definition and Identification: SEN is defined as a learning difficulty or disability which calls for special educational provision to be made. Schools are responsible for identifying pupils with SEN using a graduated approach (‘Assess, Plan, Do, Review’). Needs fall into four broad areas: Communication and interaction; Cognition and learning; Social, emotional and mental health difficulties; and Sensory and/or physical needs.

  • Graduated Approach (SEN Support): Most children with SEN have their needs met within mainstream schools through ‘SEN Support’. This involves teachers adapting their teaching, potentially with advice from the school’s Special Educational Needs Coordinator (SENCO), and implementing targeted interventions. Progress is regularly reviewed with parents/carers and the pupil.

  • Education, Health and Care Plans (EHCPs): For children and young people with more complex, long-term needs requiring support beyond what a mainstream school can typically provide through SEN Support, a statutory assessment may be requested (by parents, the school, or the young person if over 16). If the Local Authority (LA) agrees to assess and subsequently determines that an EHCP is necessary, this legal document outlines the child’s needs and the specific educational, health, and social care provision required to meet those needs. The EHCP includes named outcomes and specifies the school placement (mainstream, special unit, or special school). LAs are legally obliged to secure the provision outlined in the EHCP.

  • Placement: The system promotes inclusion in mainstream settings where possible, but a continuum of provision exists, including resource bases attached to mainstream schools and maintained or independent special schools catering for specific types of needs (e.g., profound and multiple learning difficulties, autism spectrum disorder, sensory impairment).

  • Funding: Schools receive funding for SEN Support through their core budget (including factors in the National Funding Formula related to deprivation and prior attainment). LAs hold ‘high needs funding blocks’ to pay for provision specified in EHCPs, including top-up funding for mainstream schools and places in special schools.

  • Challenges: The UK system faces significant challenges, including rising demand for EHCP assessments and provision, insufficient funding leading to pressures on LA budgets, delays in assessments and plan finalisation, disputes between families and LAs (often leading to tribunals), shortages of specialist staff (e.g., educational psychologists, speech therapists), and concerns about the consistency and quality of SEN Support in some mainstream schools.

The US System: Special Education (SPED)
The primary federal law governing special education in the US is the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), first enacted in 1975 (as the Education for All Handicapped Children Act) and reauthorized periodically.

  • Core Principles of IDEA: IDEA guarantees eligible children with disabilities a Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) tailored to their individual needs. Key principles include:

    • Zero Reject: Schools must educate all eligible children with disabilities.

    • Nondiscriminatory Evaluation: Assessment must be fair and unbiased to determine eligibility under specific disability categories defined by IDEA (e.g., specific learning disability, autism, speech or language impairment, emotional disturbance).

    • Individualized Education Program (IEP): A legally binding document developed by a team (including parents, teachers, administrators, specialists, and the student when appropriate) that outlines the child’s present levels of performance, measurable annual goals, specific special education and related services (e.g., therapy, counseling), accommodations/modifications, and placement.

    • Least Restrictive Environment (LRE): Students with disabilities must be educated alongside their non-disabled peers to the maximum extent appropriate. Removal from the regular classroom should only occur when the nature or severity of the disability prevents satisfactory education even with supplementary aids and services.

    • Parental Participation: Parents have the right to be involved in identification, evaluation, placement decisions, and the development of the IEP.

    • Procedural Safeguards: Processes are in place to protect the rights of parents and children, including mediation and due process hearings to resolve disputes.

  • Section 504: Students with disabilities who do not qualify for an IEP under IDEA may still be eligible for accommodations under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, which prohibits discrimination based on disability in programs receiving federal funding. A ‘504 Plan’ outlines necessary accommodations (e.g., preferential seating, extended time on tests).

  • Placement: Similar to the UK, a continuum of placements exists, ranging from full inclusion in general education classrooms with support, to resource rooms, self-contained special education classrooms, special schools, and residential facilities, determined by the LRE principle and the IEP team.

  • Funding: IDEA provides federal funding to states and local school districts to help cover the excess costs of special education. However, the federal government has consistently failed to provide the 40% of excess costs it originally promised, leaving states and local districts to cover the shortfall, which can strain budgets, particularly in under-resourced districts.

  • Challenges: The US system faces challenges including chronic underfunding of IDEA mandates, significant variability in identification rates and service quality across states and districts, disproportionate representation of minority students in certain disability categories and more restrictive placements, shortages of qualified special education teachers and related service personnel, bureaucratic complexities of the IEP process, and frequent litigation between parents and school districts.

Comparing the Systems

  • Legal Framework: Both have strong legal bases (Children & Families Act / SEND Code of Practice in UK; IDEA / Section 504 in US) establishing rights and procedures.

  • Individual Plans: Both use individualized plans (EHCP in UK, IEP in US) to detail needs and provision for students with significant needs.

  • Inclusion Emphasis: Both promote inclusion (LRE in US) but maintain a continuum of placements.

  • Terminology: UK uses SEN/SEND; US primarily uses ‘disability’ and ‘Special Education’.

  • Age Range: UK framework explicitly covers 0-25; IDEA primarily covers ages 3-21 (with early intervention services birth-3).

  • Assessment Process: UK has ‘SEN Support’ as a first step before statutory EHCP assessment; US focuses on evaluation for eligibility under specific IDEA categories.

  • Funding Issues: Both systems struggle with funding adequacy and allocation, leading to resource constraints and disputes.

  • Parental Role: Both emphasize parental involvement, but adversarial relationships and disputes can arise in both systems.

Conclusion
Both the UK and the US have made significant strides in recognizing the rights of students with special educational needs or disabilities and establishing complex systems to provide support. The UK’s SEND framework emphasizes a graduated approach and integrated EHC Plans, while the US’s IDEA guarantees FAPE through legally binding IEPs within the least restrictive environment. Despite these robust frameworks, both systems face persistent challenges related to funding shortfalls, staffing shortages, bureaucratic hurdles, ensuring equitable access and quality across diverse populations, and navigating the often-complex relationship between families and schools/authorities. Supporting every learner effectively requires not only strong legal mandates but also adequate resources, well-trained professionals, and a genuine commitment to inclusion and individualized support within the broader education system.

Leave a Comment