Provision for children and young people with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) remains one of England’s most persistent education challenges. Despite multiple reforms, the system is still fragmented, under-resourced, and overly bureaucratic, with outcomes for pupils and families falling short of the Government’s ambitions for inclusion and equity.
Our recent review, “Special Educational Needs: Support in England – A Critical Analysis”, finds that while national policy describes the system in detail, it fails to address the deeper issue driving the SEND crisis – a lack of coherent vision that places inclusion and pastoral development at the centre of education.
The review also highlights a fundamental conceptual flaw: the bundling of disability with special educational needs under one administrative framework. This approach assumes similar learning requirements across vastly different circumstances, reinforcing a deficit model that treats physical disability as synonymous with limited intellectual ability or academic potential.
These national weaknesses are clearly reflected locally in Harrow, where procedural compliance often outweighs meaningful support for children and families. Harrow’s SEND and Alternative Provision Strategy 2024–2029 outlines strong ambitions – early intervention, inclusion, and preparation for adulthood – yet faces familiar barriers: constrained funding, delayed assessments, and growing pressure on mainstream schools. The proposal for a new Ridgeway SEND School responds to local demand but also mirrors the national over-reliance on specialist settings rather than building true inclusion within mainstream education.
Although Harrow promotes co-production with parents and carers, many still experience inconsistent support and delayed responses, revealing a wider pattern of tokenistic participation. Persistent budget pressures within the borough’s high needs block continue to reproduce the national tension between financial control and educational fairness.
In short, Harrow’s SEND picture mirrors the national weaknesses – bureaucratic, fragmented, and conceptually flawed. Until both national and local policy adopt a clear, inclusive vision that distinguishes disability from learning need and values diversity as a strength, SEND provision will remain a system that manages difference rather than embraces it.
Our recent review, “Special Educational Needs: Support in England – A Critical Analysis”, finds that while national policy describes the system in detail, it fails to address the deeper issue driving the SEND crisis – a lack of coherent vision that places inclusion and pastoral development at the centre of education.
The review also highlights a fundamental conceptual flaw: the bundling of disability with special educational needs under one administrative framework. This approach assumes similar learning requirements across vastly different circumstances, reinforcing a deficit model that treats physical disability as synonymous with limited intellectual ability or academic potential.
These national weaknesses are clearly reflected locally in Harrow, where procedural compliance often outweighs meaningful support for children and families. Harrow’s SEND and Alternative Provision Strategy 2024–2029 outlines strong ambitions – early intervention, inclusion, and preparation for adulthood – yet faces familiar barriers: constrained funding, delayed assessments, and growing pressure on mainstream schools. The proposal for a new Ridgeway SEND School responds to local demand but also mirrors the national over-reliance on specialist settings rather than building true inclusion within mainstream education.
Although Harrow promotes co-production with parents and carers, many still experience inconsistent support and delayed responses, revealing a wider pattern of tokenistic participation. Persistent budget pressures within the borough’s high needs block continue to reproduce the national tension between financial control and educational fairness.
In short, Harrow’s SEND picture mirrors the national weaknesses – bureaucratic, fragmented, and conceptually flawed. Until both national and local policy adopt a clear, inclusive vision that distinguishes disability from learning need and values diversity as a strength, SEND provision will remain a system that manages difference rather than embraces it.
Harrow Monitoring Group 