Education
The Guardian view on special needs reform: children’s needs must be the priority as the system is redesigned | Editorial
Children with special educational needs and disabilities (Send) must be supported through the education system to fulfil their potential as fully as possible. This is the bottom line for the families of the 1.6 million children with a recognised additional learning need in England, and all those who support them. It needs to be the government’s priority too.
There is no question that the rising number of children receiving extra help has placed pressure on schools and councils. There is wide agreement that the current trajectory is not sustainable. But if plans for reform are shaped around the aim of saving money by removing entitlements, rather than meeting the needs of children by improving schools, they should be expected to fail.
If ministers did not already know this, the Save Our Children’s Rights campaign launched this week ought to help. As it stands, there is no policy of restricting access to the education, health and care plans (EHCPs) that impose a legal duty on councils to provide specified support. But ministers’ criticisms of the adversarial aspects of the current system have led families to conclude that they should prepare for an attempt to remove their enforceable rights. Christine Lenehan, who advises the government, has indicated that the scope of EHCPs could be narrowed, while stressing a commitment to consultation. Tom Rees, who chairs the department for education’s specialist group, bluntly terms it “a bad system”.
Mr Rees’s panel has had its term extended until April. The education select committee will present the conclusions of its inquiry into the Send crisis in the autumn. Both should be listened to carefully. But the education secretary, Bridget Phillipson, and her team also need to show that they are capable of engaging beyond the circle of appointed experts and parliamentarians. Parents can make their views known through constituency MPs. Their voices and perspectives need to be heard in Whitehall too.
This is a hugely sensitive policy area. There is nothing parents care more about than the opportunities provided to their children, and this concern is intensified when those children have additional needs. Some positive steps have been taken during Labour’s first year. Increased capital spending on school buildings should make a difference to in-house provision, which relies on the availability of suitable spaces. Ministers are right, too, to focus on teacher training, while inclusion has been given greater prominence in the inspection framework. As with the NHS, there is a welcome emphasis on spreading best practice.
But big questions remain. Families are fearful that accountability mechanisms are going to be removed, and want to know how the new “inclusive mainstream” will be defined and judged. Councils are concerned about what happens to their £5bn in special needs budget deficits, when the so-called statutory override expires in 2028. The concerning role of private equity in special education – which mirrors changes in the children’s social care market – also needs addressing.
Schools need to adapt so that a greater range of pupils can be accommodated. The issue is how the government manages that process. The hope must be that the lesson ministers take from their failure on welfare is that consultation on highly sensitive changes, affecting millions of lives, must be thorough. In order to make change, they must build consensus.
-
Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.
Education
Overcoming Roadblocks to Innovation — Campus Technology
Register Now for Tech Tactics in Education: Overcoming Roadblocks to Innovation
Tech Tactics in Education will return on Sept. 25 with the conference theme “Overcoming Roadblocks to Innovation.” Registration for the fully virtual event, brought to you by the producers of Campus Technology and THE Journal, is now open.
Offering hands-on learning and interactive discussions on the most critical technology issues and practices across K–12 and higher education, the conference will cover key topics such as:
- Tapping into the potential of AI in education;
- Navigating cybersecurity and data privacy concerns;
- Leadership and change management;
- Evaluating emerging ed tech choices;
- Foundational infrastructure for technology innovation;
- And more.
A full agenda will be announced in the coming weeks.
Call for Speakers Still Open
Tech Tactics in Education seeks higher education and K-12 IT leaders and practitioners, independent consultants, association or nonprofit organization leaders, and others in the field of technology in education to share their expertise and experience at the event. Session proposals are due by Friday, July 11.
For more information, visit TechTacticsInEducation.com.
About the Author
Rhea Kelly is editor in chief for Campus Technology, THE Journal, and Spaces4Learning. She can be reached at [email protected].
Education
9 AI Ethics Scenarios (and What School Librarians Would Do)
A common refrain about artificial intelligence in education is that it’s a research tool, and as such, some school librarians are acquiring firsthand experience with its uses and controversies.
Leading a presentation last week at the ISTELive 25 + ASCD annual conference in San Antonio, a trio of librarians parsed appropriate and inappropriate uses of AI in a series of hypothetical scenarios. They broadly recommended that schools have, and clearly articulate, official policies governing AI use and be cautious about inputting copyrighted or private information.
Amanda Hunt, a librarian at Oak Run Middle School in Texas, said their presentation would focus on scenarios because librarians are experiencing so many.
“The reason we did it this way is because these scenarios are coming up,” she said. “Every day I’m hearing some other type of question in regards to AI and how we’re using it in the classroom or in the library.”
- Scenario 1: A class encourages students to use generative AI for brainstorming, outlining and summarizing articles.
Elissa Malespina, a teacher librarian at Science Park High School in New Jersey, said she felt this was a valid use, as she has found AI to be helpful for high schoolers who are prone to get overwhelmed by research projects.
Ashley Cooksey, an assistant professor and school library program director at Arkansas Tech University, disagreed slightly: While she appreciates AI’s ability to outline and brainstorm, she said, she would discourage her students from using it to synthesize summaries.
“Point one on that is that you’re not using your synthesis and digging deep and reading the article for yourself to pull out the information pertinent to you,” she said. “Point No. 2 — I publish, I write. If you’re in higher ed, you do that. I don’t want someone to put my work into a piece of generative AI and an [LLM] that is then going to use work I worked very, very hard on to train its language learning model.”
- Scenario 2: A school district buys an AI tool that generates student book reviews for a library website, which saves time and promotes titles but misses key themes or introduces unintended bias.
All three speakers said this use of AI could certainly be helpful to librarians, but if the reviews are labeled in a way that makes it sound like they were written by students when they weren’t, that wouldn’t be ethical.
- Scenario 3: An administrator asks a librarian to use AI to generate new curriculum materials and library signage. Do the outputs violate copyright or proper attribution rules?
Hunt said the answer depends on local and district regulations, but she recommended using Adobe Express because it doesn’t pull from the Internet.
- Scenario 4: An ed-tech vendor pitches a school library on an AI tool that analyzes circulation data and automatically recommends titles to purchase. It learns from the school’s preferences but often excludes lesser-known topics or authors of certain backgrounds.
Hunt, Malespina and Cooksey agreed that this would be problematic, especially because entering circulation data could include personally identifiable information, which should never be entered into an AI.
- Scenario 5: At a school that doesn’t have a clear AI policy, a student uses AI to summarize a research article and gets accused of plagiarism. Who is responsible, and what is the librarian’s role?
The speakers as well as polled audience members tended to agree the school district would be responsible in this scenario. Without a policy in place, the school will have a harder time establishing whether a student’s behavior constitutes plagiarism.
Cooksey emphasized the need for ongoing professional development, and Hunt said any districts that don’t have an official AI policy need steady pressure until they draft one.
“I am the squeaky wheel right now in my district, and I’m going to continue to be annoying about it, but I feel like we need to have something in place,” Hunt said.
- Scenario 6: Attempting to cause trouble, a student creates a deepfake of a teacher acting inappropriately. Administrators struggle to respond, they have no specific policy in place, and trust is shaken.
Again, the speakers said this is one more example to illustrate the importance of AI policies as well as AI literacy.
“We’re getting to this point where we need to be questioning so much of what we see, hear and read,” Hunt said.
- Scenario 7: A pilot program uses AI to provide instant feedback on student essays, but English language learners consistently get lower scores, leading teachers to worry the AI system can’t recognize code-switching or cultural context.
In response to this situation, Hunt said it’s important to know whether the parent has given their permission to enter student essays into an AI, and the teacher or librarian should still be reading the essays themselves.
Malespina and Cooksey both cautioned against relying on AI plagiarism detection tools.
“None of these tools can do a good enough job, and they are biased toward [English language learners],” Malespina said.
- Scenario 8: A school-approved AI system flags students who haven’t checked out any books recently, tracks their reading speed and completion patterns, and recommends interventions.
Malespina said she doesn’t want an AI tool tracking students in that much detail, and Cooksey pointed out that reading speed and completion patterns aren’t reliably indicative of anything that teachers need to know about students.
- Scenario 9: An AI tool translates texts, reads books aloud and simplifies complex texts for students with individualized education programs, but it doesn’t always translate nuance or tone.
Hunt said she sees benefit in this kind of application for students who need extra support, but she said the loss of tone could be an issue, and it raises questions about infringing on audiobook copyright laws.
Cooksey expounded upon that.
“Additionally, copyright goes beyond the printed work. … That copyright owner also owns the presentation rights, the audio rights and anything like that,” she said. “So if they’re putting something into a generative AI tool that reads the PDF, that is technically a violation of copyright in that moment, because there are available tools for audio versions of books for this reason, and they’re widely available. Sora is great, and it’s free for educators. … But when you’re talking about taking something that belongs to someone else and generating a brand-new copied product of that, that’s not fair use.”
Education
Bret Harte Superintendent Named To State Boards On School Finance And AI
-
Funding & Business1 week ago
Kayak and Expedia race to build AI travel agents that turn social posts into itineraries
-
Jobs & Careers7 days ago
Mumbai-based Perplexity Alternative Has 60k+ Users Without Funding
-
Mergers & Acquisitions7 days ago
Donald Trump suggests US government review subsidies to Elon Musk’s companies
-
Funding & Business7 days ago
Rethinking Venture Capital’s Talent Pipeline
-
Jobs & Careers7 days ago
Why Agentic AI Isn’t Pure Hype (And What Skeptics Aren’t Seeing Yet)
-
Funding & Business4 days ago
Sakana AI’s TreeQuest: Deploy multi-model teams that outperform individual LLMs by 30%
-
Jobs & Careers7 days ago
Telangana Launches TGDeX—India’s First State‑Led AI Public Infrastructure
-
Funding & Business1 week ago
From chatbots to collaborators: How AI agents are reshaping enterprise work
-
Jobs & Careers7 days ago
Astrophel Aerospace Raises ₹6.84 Crore to Build Reusable Launch Vehicle
-
Funding & Business7 days ago
Europe’s Most Ambitious Startups Aren’t Becoming Global; They’re Starting That Way